Notices
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 653
Like Tree229Likes

Thread: Will a atheist believe if god really sends a sign?

  1. #101  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Science uses the term probabilities, is it not a another word for belief?
    That is an absolutely extraordinary statement. Is mathematics another word for belief?
    MrMojo1 likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #102  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Science uses the term probabilities, is it not a another word for belief?
    Absolutely not. It's a calculation or a measurement.

    Probability - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #103  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    71
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #104  
    Forum Senior pineapples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ireland someplace
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    I’ve seen enough ghosts on youtube to convince me that they don’t exist.

    Also, the supernatural term is nonsensical. If an apparently supernatural event occurs in nature then, it’s no longer supernatural, but a natural event that can be studied.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #105  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Why are you people not understanding my question.I am saying that let's change think you asked god to teleport me to (wherever you want to ) if you exist.You say it in your mind.How can some disgusting alien thing can understand it.Next is you are awake and you disappear and are in the place you want and no one is with you when you are done you ask god to take me again to my native place.Then same happens and you reach there awake in your room.No point for you to say someone spiked,or hypnotized or alien did it.You all are giving clear signs that it's just you don't want to believe. Dont ask my question to me.Everyone thanks for replying but please clearly tell what is the sign that you just can't deny.Thank you
    If that happens to me, the only thing going through my head will be, "Never eat the tuna sandwich at a gas station again..."

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    there has to be something outside of knowing, belief can be the jumping pad to knowing.
    If you're on a diving board and you're blindfolded, do you jump head first into the pool simply because someone told you it is full of water? That is belief.

    Belief is a fool's diving board.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Science uses the term probabilities, is it not a another word for belief?
    Not even close.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    How are any of those different than gods?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #106  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Belief is a fool's diving board.
    I'm keeping that.
    KALSTER and Flick Montana like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #107  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    If you can produce objective evidence that they are part of reality then I would consider it. (But, of course, they would no longer be supernatural.)

    If they are not part of reality, then I'm not sure what basis you can have to say they exist (except as mental models).

    And if they don't exist, why would you believe in them?
    Flick Montana likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #108  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,150
    ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    No one is walking down the street and saying out of the blue, "hey maybe there are magical beings living in oil lamps and able to grant not 2 but 3 wishes"
    The supernatural is mostly a question of fiction(stories, fables, superstitions,misunderstanding), which particular set fiction mostly depends on culture. This fiction in turn is a frame of reference for people to interpret what they see around them, which feeds the stories. Simple observation should be enough to realize that all religions are BS, it is man made fiction. I dont believe in ghosts, but I like ghost stories, I like the mythology and the narrative it can bring to works of fiction.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #109  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    Do you believe in Harry Potter and Dr Who?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #110  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    Do you believe in Harry Potter and Dr Who?
    No. But ...

    ... I dearly want a Tardis and a game of Quidditch.
    Lynx_Fox and GiantEvil like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #111  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Do you believe in Harry Potter and Dr Who?
    No. But ...

    ... I dearly want a Tardis and a game of Quidditch.
    Chances are the Doctor has a quidditch arena in his Tardis.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #112  
    Forum Bachelors Degree GoldenRatio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Belief is a fool's diving board.
    And the swimming pool is full of ignorance.

    About the OP question.

    As others have stated, what would qualify as a "sign from god" that could not be explained away through other means such as superior extraterrestrial race.

    An elephant disappearing right before my eyes? Would that count? How about a woman getting sawed in half then reappearing as whole? if so, I know of several magicians whom qualify as "gods" Lets go more biblical, how about water being turned into wine? Have seen illusionists do that as well. Its nothing special. Makes me think jesus was nothing but a very clever and convincing magician & conman. One person says miracles, the other says mirrors.

    So, what would qualify as a sign from god, How would you go about proving that it did indeed come from god and not another source, Even if you could find no explanation as to how said miracle occurred that still does not automatically correlate to "god did it" At best, all it means is "we do not know" and thus, further exploring must be done. Much like how the big bang happen, science doesn't say "we dont know, thus god did it" we simply say "we do not know" and keep searching for the answer.

    So, firstly determining such a miracle was from god would be necessary.

    Secondly I would ask, is this sign to be presented to just me personally. Or the world as a whole? If its just me, It would not matter. People would think i am delusional (which if i am seeing bullshit & thinking its legit, I probably am) If it is presented to the entire planet then It becomes more convincing but it is still difficult to prove it was from god.

    Others have mentioned "what god is it from" I really dont care, I would prefer that such a god takes credit. If zeus decided to send down a miracle It would be helpful so that everyone could stop worshiping their false gods & fall in line with zeus.

    Lastly, if there was a sign from god. I would like it to be world peace, end to hunger/poverty/disease/ect. Space travel would be nice too...magically, in the blink of the eye. Would it convince me? Eh, dunno. It would certainly place more possibility than the current non-existence of a god. Scientific inquiry would be necessary, but it would open the possibility of the supernatural.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #113  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post

    I cannot see how one can know everything, there has to be something outside of knowing, belief can be the jumping pad to knowing.
    No one says we have to know everything, in fact there are really good physical and statistically reasons why many things will remain unknowable. It's not really part of this discussion. Belief is seldom a jumping pad to knowledge...if anything it's most often the opposite.

    How do you get rid of anything once there is the opposite?
    Huh?

    Science uses the term probabilities, is it not a another word for belief?
    Not at all. Belief implies (at least how religious has monopolized the term) that empirical verifiable evidence isn't required. Probability doesn't lead to belief...it leads to likelihood of conclusions based on physical evidence or if it's a process in question until a better fitting hypothesis comes along.
    What I see here is a lot of word jumping, I want to get to the heart of the matter but it seems we may have to begin to define what we interpret things to be. I am willing to meet half way since I am not a scientist in your terms, and only know so much in the scientific language.

    I am not sure if we can just change the objective of the thread and go off into defining belief. maybe we should open a thread to discuss this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #114  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    What I see here is a lot of word jumping
    No, what you're seeing is YOU being asked about the nonsense that you post.

    I am willing to meet half way since I am not a scientist in your terms
    You're not a scientist. In ANY terms.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #115  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by pineapples View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    I’ve seen enough ghosts on youtube to convince me that they don’t exist.

    Also, the supernatural term is nonsensical. If an apparently supernatural event occurs in nature then, it’s no longer supernatural, but a natural event that can be studied.
    Do you know of a better term to describe those things at present unapproachable by science?

    Of course, if they are in fact real, then it stands to reason that at some future time they will be approachable by science, but unfortunately that time is not yet.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    If you can produce objective evidence that they are part of reality then I would consider it. (But, of course, they would no longer be supernatural.)

    If they are not part of reality, then I'm not sure what basis you can have to say they exist (except as mental models).

    And if they don't exist, why would you believe in them?
    A thing can be proven to exist beyond reasonable doubt and still be impossible to study using available tools. The interior of black holes, for example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    Yeah. I'm convinced of it, or at least some form of it.

    How exactly it works is not something I could easily specify. So I couldn't say if any particular mythology is true like spirits or Jinns.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #116  
    Forum Masters Degree pavlos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    liverpool
    Posts
    715
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    None! No! Nothing! It is infantile to do so.
    astromark likes this.
    A logician saves the life of a tiny space alien. The alien is very grateful and, since she's omniscient, offers the following reward: she offers to answer any question the logician might pose. Without too much thought (after all, he's a logician), he asks: "What is the best question to ask and what is the correct answer to that question?" The tiny alien pauses. Finally she replies, "The best question is the one you just asked; and the correct answer is the one I gave."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #117  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    A thing can be proven to exist beyond reasonable doubt and still be impossible to study using available tools. The interior of black holes, for example.
    Except that mathematics can "study" them...
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #118  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    No, of course not.

    I am an atheist. I have no belief in anything supernatural, be it spirits, jinns, elves, fairies or gods.

    Your original question was would an atheist believe in god if god really sent them a sign. The debate then became what qualifies as a sign, and how are we to know that the sign was actually from god, the alleged creator of the universe, rather than from some other source (super high tech aliens pretending to be god in order to play a cosmic joke on us, Derren Brown playing with our minds and secretly filming us for his next TV special, hallucinations, madness, etc).

    Here is what I would not consider as evidence for god:
    Me wishing for a sign and then going to sleep and then waking up on the other side of the world, or with a souvenir from another country
    The hypnotist/trickster/showman Derren Brown actually did something similar to this to someone, apparently without their knowledge, for his TV show "Trick of Treat"... or DID he?



    The point I am making is that even a seemingly quite extraordinary event might have a non-god explanation.

    Here is what I would consider as evidence for god:

    The creator of the universe actually coming before me, and showing me his works. The creator and destroyer of worlds actually showing me the act of creating or destroying worlds. The creator of life actually taking me around the universe he created and showing me either examples of the other life he has created in the universe, or alternatively somehow showing me that the rest of the universe is empty of life and we are his special project. And then he would have to somehow prove to me that I wasn't suffering from some sort of psychosis (which I might well be, after a journey like that!). Or prove that he wasn't a super advanced alien posing as god and coming before the world in order to dupe or exploit us in some way (aliens move in mysterious ways, after all).

    For the scenario to prove the existence of god to me, and thus make me believe in god, it has to be beyond all doubt that I have actual evidence for god, not some other phenomena.

    In fact, I think the only thing that might actually convince me were if he were to totally destroy the universe! And even then I'm not sure I would be totally convinced.
    "Ok, brain let's get things straight. You don't like me, and I don't like you, so let's do this so I can go back to killing you with beer." - Homer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #119  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    I suddenly have this image of God locked up in a secure hospital, hanging on to the bars and yelling, "But I am God."
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #120  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Personal experience can be a rational reason to accept a truth. I'm talking in generalities here, forget the OPs premise for a minute. If I saw an insect get eaten by a fish, then that snake jumped back into the sea, I would have zero evidence but also zero reason to believe it didn't happen. If anyone says, 'that's different, that fits into what we know about fish.' You aren't hearing what aim saying. I'm not comparing it to any other instance. What I am saying is that personal experience can be a valid reason to accept something. In more bizarre instances, personal experience is something you shouldn't just ignore. Even if you shouldn't trust your senses implicitly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #121  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I suddenly have this image of God locked up in a secure hospital, hanging on to the bars and yelling, "But I am God."
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #122  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    A thing can be proven to exist beyond reasonable doubt and still be impossible to study using available tools. The interior of black holes, for example.
    Except that mathematics can "study" them...

    Religions often have logical frameworks which you can use to study their concept of a god.

    As I see it, all logic is equivalent. Numbers, "ones" and "zeros", boolean operators,.... you name it. Everything that happens in a human mind is reducible to an equation. Math just has the advantage that the reduction has already been made when you start.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post

    Here is what I would consider as evidence for god:

    The creator of the universe actually coming before me, and showing me his works. The creator and destroyer of worlds actually showing me the act of creating or destroying worlds. The creator of life actually taking me around the universe he created and showing me either examples of the other life he has created in the universe, or alternatively somehow showing me that the rest of the universe is empty of life and we are his special project. And then he would have to somehow prove to me that I wasn't suffering from some sort of psychosis (which I might well be, after a journey like that!). Or prove that he wasn't a super advanced alien posing as god and coming before the world in order to dupe or exploit us in some way (aliens move in mysterious ways, after all).

    For the scenario to prove the existence of god to me, and thus make me believe in god, it has to be beyond all doubt that I have actual evidence for god, not some other phenomena.

    In fact, I think the only thing that might actually convince me were if he were to totally destroy the universe! And even then I'm not sure I would be totally convinced.
    Why would any of that be convincing to you? You're essentially saying you want him to show you a bunch of stuff, tell you he's the creator of it, and then make you believe he's not lying or using illusions.

    Why not just skip to the last step, then? Just have him tell you and make you believe he isn't lying?

    The last step is where most theists start. They get some kind of really strong feeling they're not being lied to. Reliance upon emotion isn't exactly scientific, but if it's the best tool available, then using the best tool available is the closest approximation to a scientific approach. Admittedly not very close, but closer than the next most scientific option.

    And of course I disagree with their conclusion. I don't think the universe has a creator. I can't disagree with their methods, though, because I am unable to propose a better one. And I consider ability to propose a better mechanism to be the only valid basis to criticize theirs.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #123  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Religions often have logical frameworks which you can use to study their concept of a god.
    Yeah, if you call an untestable a priori assumption - with no application - a "logical framework".

    Everything that happens in a human mind is reducible to an equation.
    Really?
    I mean, really?
    Get in touch with neurologists and social scientists. NOW! They're waiting to hear from you.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #124  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Religions often have logical frameworks which you can use to study their concept of a god.
    Yeah, if you call an untestable a priori assumption - with no application - a "logical framework".
    Everything that happens in a human mind is reducible to an equation.
    Really?I mean, really?Get in touch with neurologists and social scientists. NOW! They're waiting to hear from you.
    From a materialistic standpoint, you could argue everything that happens anywhere is an equation. It may not be totally predictable because of uncertainty, but it could be reduced to probabilities. That may not be what he means, though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #125  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    I suddenly have this image of God locked up in a secure hospital, hanging on to the bars and yelling, "But I am God."
    My trivial (and a bit light hearted) view about belief is:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZjZI6eGtcM
    Last edited by Lynx_Fox; April 15th, 2014 at 01:00 AM.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #126  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Religions often have logical frameworks which you can use to study their concept of a god.
    Yeah, if you call an untestable a priori assumption - with no application - a "logical framework".
    Math and and other forms of deductive logic equally suffer from the problem that their conclusions are only as good as the assumptions they start with. If you use bad deductive logic, you'll end up with a conclusion that contains less truth value than the truth value contained in the assumptions you started with. If you use good deductive logic, your conclusions will conserve the truth value. But you can't arrive at more truth value than you start with.

    The "logical framework" is what you build on top of your assumptions. It's possible to have a really great logical framework built on assumptions that are just plain silly.

    The conclusions you arrive at using that framework will be just as silly as the as the assumptions, of course. But if you had used a bad framework, then your conclusions would be even more silly than your assumptions.

    Inductive logic, on the other hand, is a different animal. But I don't think we're discussing inductive logic.

    Everything that happens in a human mind is reducible to an equation.
    Really?
    I mean, really?
    Get in touch with neurologists and social scientists. NOW! They're waiting to hear from you.
    I'm pretty sure most of them agree with me.

    Just because something is reducible to an equation doesn't mean it's going to be a simple equation.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #127  
    Forum Senior pineapples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ireland someplace
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by pineapples View Post
    I’ve seen enough ghosts on youtube to convince me that they don’t exist.

    Also, the supernatural term is nonsensical. If an apparently supernatural event occurs in nature then, it’s no longer supernatural, but a natural event that can be studied.
    Do you know of a better term to describe those things at present unapproachable by science?

    Of course, if they are in fact real, then it stands to reason that at some future time they will be approachable by science, but unfortunately that time is not yet.
    If a seemingly giant god like hand came down from parted clouds and plonked a new species of giraffe into existence, then I could opt for a term like unexplained phenomenon had just occurred over a supernatural one. As a term, I do think the supernatural belongs only in fiction, where you have to suspend disbelief.

    Case in point. Steve Martin looks for a sign
    icewendigo likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #128  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Everything that happens in a human mind is reducible to an equation.
    Really?
    I mean, really?
    Get in touch with neurologists and social scientists. NOW! They're waiting to hear from you.
    I'm pretty sure most of them agree with me.[/quote]

    Maybe you meant "Will eventually be reducible to to an equation".
    Because we're nowhere near that currently.

    The "logical framework" is what you build on top of your assumptions. It's possible to have a really great logical framework built on assumptions that are just plain silly.
    The conclusions you arrive at using that framework will be just as silly as the as the assumptions, of course. But if you had used a bad framework, then your conclusions would be even more silly than your assumptions.
    Since this was in regard to
    Religions often have logical frameworks which you can use to study their concept of a god.
    Then yeah, it's not much of a "study" is it?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #129  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Personal experience can be a rational reason to accept a truth. I'm talking in generalities here, forget the OPs premise for a minute. If I saw an insect get eaten by a fish, then that snake jumped back into the sea, I would have zero evidence but also zero reason to believe it didn't happen. If anyone says, 'that's different, that fits into what we know about fish.' You aren't hearing what aim saying. I'm not comparing it to any other instance. What I am saying is that personal experience can be a valid reason to accept something. In more bizarre instances, personal experience is something you shouldn't just ignore. Even if you shouldn't trust your senses implicitly.
    I do not know why your point is not the center point of gravity since everything evolves around I. The individual experience is what makes up the total experience. We perceive life on an individual basis, and on a planetary basis, even on a universal basis.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #130  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Oh, Stargate is posting nonsense again.
    There's a surprise.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #131  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Personal experience can be a rational reason to accept a truth. I'm talking in generalities here, forget the OPs premise for a minute. If I saw an insect get eaten by a fish, then that snake jumped back into the sea, I would have zero evidence but also zero reason to believe it didn't happen. If anyone says, 'that's different, that fits into what we know about fish.' You aren't hearing what aim saying. I'm not comparing it to any other instance. What I am saying is that personal experience can be a valid reason to accept something. In more bizarre instances, personal experience is something you shouldn't just ignore. Even if you shouldn't trust your senses implicitly.
    I do not know why your point is not the center point of gravity since everything evolves around I. The individual experience is what makes up the total experience. We perceive life on an individual basis, and on a planetary basis, even on a universal basis.
    If you mean everyone has their own personal flow/perception of time and vantage point in the universe, sure, okay. But that doesn't mean I am the center point of gravity or that I am at rest and everything else is in motion around me. I suppose I could say I am the center point for the personal universe I perceive, since the universe looks the same in all directions from where I stand so there's no other reference point I know of, but that doesn't mean celestial bodies orbit me. And I could just as easily say I perceive a universe with no center.

    I'm not sure what you mean with the gravity thing. Even though I can only directly observe the universe from my vantage point, I can observe through data that my gravitational force is very low.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #132  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I do not know why your point is not the center point of gravity since everything evolves around I. The individual experience is what makes up the total experience. We perceive life on an individual basis, and on a planetary basis, even on a universal basis.
    What the huh?

    Observation is only a small part of science. Eliminating personal bias comes from the peer review process and, prior to that, collaboration of scientists among differing fields.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #133  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Personal experience can be a rational reason to accept a truth. I'm talking in generalities here, forget the OPs premise for a minute. If I saw an insect get eaten by a fish, then that snake jumped back into the sea, I would have zero evidence but also zero reason to believe it didn't happen. If anyone says, 'that's different, that fits into what we know about fish.' You aren't hearing what aim saying. I'm not comparing it to any other instance. What I am saying is that personal experience can be a valid reason to accept something. In more bizarre instances, personal experience is something you shouldn't just ignore. Even if you shouldn't trust your senses implicitly.
    I do not know why your point is not the center point of gravity since everything evolves around I. The individual experience is what makes up the total experience. We perceive life on an individual basis, and on a planetary basis, even on a universal basis.
    If you mean everyone has their own personal flow/perception of time and vantage point in the universe, sure, okay. But that doesn't mean I am the center point of gravity or that I am at rest and everything else is in motion around me. I suppose I could say I am the center point for the personal universe I perceive, since the universe looks the same in all directions from where I stand so there's no other reference point I know of, but that doesn't mean celestial bodies orbit me. And I could just as easily say I perceive a universe with no center.

    I'm not sure what you mean with the gravity thing. Even though I can only directly observe the universe from my vantage point, I can observe through data that my gravitational force is very low.
    You may not think celestial bodies are not orbiting you , but if you could see it from a planet point of view your are doing the same thing other bodies are doing to you. maybe you cannot see everything evolving around you but you cannot remove yourself from the center, or can you?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #134  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Well that makes no sense.
    MrMojo1 and Flick Montana like this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #135  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    You may not think celestial bodies are not orbiting you
    Personally, I've never been a big fan of the moon.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #136  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Personal experience can be a rational reason to accept a truth. I'm talking in generalities here, forget the OPs premise for a minute. If I saw an insect get eaten by a fish, then that snake jumped back into the sea, I would have zero evidence but also zero reason to believe it didn't happen. If anyone says, 'that's different, that fits into what we know about fish.' You aren't hearing what aim saying. I'm not comparing it to any other instance. What I am saying is that personal experience can be a valid reason to accept something. In more bizarre instances, personal experience is something you shouldn't just ignore. Even if you shouldn't trust your senses implicitly.
    I do not know why your point is not the center point of gravity since everything evolves around I. The individual experience is what makes up the total experience. We perceive life on an individual basis, and on a planetary basis, even on a universal basis.
    If you mean everyone has their own personal flow/perception of time and vantage point in the universe, sure, okay. But that doesn't mean I am the center point of gravity or that I am at rest and everything else is in motion around me. I suppose I could say I am the center point for the personal universe I perceive, since the universe looks the same in all directions from where I stand so there's no other reference point I know of, but that doesn't mean celestial bodies orbit me. And I could just as easily say I perceive a universe with no center.

    I'm not sure what you mean with the gravity thing. Even though I can only directly observe the universe from my vantage point, I can observe through data that my gravitational force is very low.
    You may not think celestial bodies are not orbiting you , but if you could see it from a planet point of view your are doing the same thing other bodies are doing to you. maybe you cannot see everything evolving around you but you cannot remove yourself from the center, or can you?
    I don't get it. Just because from the right vantage point it may look as though things are orbiting around me and I am the center of them, doesn't mean they actually are.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #137  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    The word "relativity" comes to mind.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #138  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    The word "relativity" comes to mind.
    But it seems like he is making the jump from that to 'each person is the center of gravity in their perceived universe.' I admitted that you could say you are the center of your own universe since you are the observer. If you wanted to say that, whatever. But that doesn't mean you are actually the center of gravity and everything is orbiting you.
    Last edited by SowZ37; April 15th, 2014 at 06:54 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #139  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Oh, I wasn't agreeing with him. My point is that observation is relative to the observer. To be honest, I don't even have a clue what Stargatge is talking about most of the time.
    Lynx_Fox, adelady, MrMojo1 and 1 others like this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #140  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    71
    Thanks all of you for your replies.Keep posting I will ask you about situation-2 in some time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #141  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by SowZ37 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    The word "relativity" comes to mind.
    But it seems like he is making the jump from that to 'each person is the center of gravity in their perceived universe.' I admitted that you could say you are the center of your own universe since you are the observer. If you wanted to say that, whatever. But that doesn't mean you are actually the center of gravity and everything is orbiting you.
    Maybe you cannot see yourself as the center point and everyone circling around you. Can you see yourself as moving on a constant cycle? All you do the whole of your life is circle around a point? We humans behave the same way our planet does, how could we not when we are made from the by the same laws that governs the planet. We are in ourselves like magnets attracting one another and influencing one another.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #142  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    We humans behave the same way our planet does
    No we don't.

    how could we not when we are made from the by the same laws that governs the planet.
    What?

    We are in ourselves like magnets attracting one another and influencing one another.
    Well I did once know a guy who was nearly fat enough to have his own noticeable gravitational field, but, apart from him, your claim is nonsense.
    Any "attraction and influence" we have on each other is NOT due to the same laws that dictate "attraction and influence" between celestial bodies.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #143  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by astromark View Post
    Complicated innuendos of there being a left of if there is a right, need not be so..
    Biblically speaking it is said that the rainbow seen was some sign or promise of the Gods intent.. That someone has drawn conclusions from biblical texts as to the meaning of a rainbow. That a modern interpretation of light refraction and rain drops might have a effect in certain light conditions. That a understanding of the spectrographic spectrum sort of places the sign in jeopardy.
    My contention is that the greater your understanding of science the harder it becomes for religious doctrines to prevail. That the people of the dark ages had no understandings of sciences allowed the control of the flock by force and fear. Religions.
    I agree somewhat, however, I think we use force more today that ever before. As I see it science is not the peoples science, it is a secret language that the majority of people do not understand. Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #144  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I agree somewhat, however, I think we use force more today that ever before.
    I suspect every single historian would disagree with you.

    As I see it science is not the peoples science, it is a secret language that the majority of people do not understand.
    Anyone can study science. Scientific information is public. There are many writers, journalists and scientists who work to make it accessible to anyone who is interested.

    Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    I can't imagine how. (But as you are wrong, it is irrelevant.)
    scoobydoo1 likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #145  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I agree somewhat, however, I think we use force more today that ever before.
    I suspect every single historian would disagree with you.

    As I see it science is not the peoples science, it is a secret language that the majority of people do not understand.
    Anyone can study science. Scientific information is public. There are many writers, journalists and scientists who work to make it accessible to anyone who is interested.

    Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    I can't imagine how. (But as you are wrong, it is irrelevant.)
    I am not wrong, most people on the planet do not understand the scientific method and cannot follow it. Most times they just follow what is being told to them without understanding the basics of science. If this is not a peoples thing but only belonging to a chosen few, this could lead to scientific dictatorship and consequently genocide.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #146  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    Just like how mathematics became a tool for dictatorship and mathematical genocide?

    I knew it! Calculus and algebra are tools for oppression, but no one believed me!
    Strange likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #147  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I am not wrong, most people on the planet do not understand the scientific method and cannot follow it.
    Even if we accept this unsupported claim, it is their choice. Science hasn't imposed ignorance on them.

    If this is not a peoples thing but only belonging to a chosen few, this could lead to scientific dictatorship and consequently genocide.
    As anyone can choose to learn science (and there are many experts willing to help them) then it doesn't belong to the "chosen few". After all, the "chosen few" made the choice to learn, themselves. Nothing is stopping you, or anyone else, following them.

    I don't even know what "scientific dictatorship" means. Dictators are interested in personal power and wealth, not science.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #148  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I am not wrong, most people on the planet do not understand the scientific method and cannot follow it. Most times they just follow what is being told to them without understanding the basics of science. If this is not a peoples thing but only belonging to a chosen few, this could lead to scientific dictatorship and consequently genocide.

    Hence the concept of education.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #149  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I am not wrong
    But you are. Again.

    most people on the planet do not understand the scientific method and cannot follow it.
    See comment below.

    Most times they just follow what is being told to them without understanding the basics of science. If this is not a peoples thing but only belonging to a chosen few
    Arrant nonsense.
    Science does NOT "belong to a chosen few".
    People who don't know science don't know because they personally have decided they're more interested in something else.
    Science is open to anyone.

    You might well argue that swimming is only "for the chosen few" on the logic you're using.
    Last edited by Dywyddyr; April 16th, 2014 at 11:12 AM.
    KALSTER and PhDemon like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #150  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Maybe you cannot see yourself as the center point and everyone circling around you.
    Because I'm not and everything doesn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Can you see yourself as moving on a constant cycle?
    I see myself living within many different cycles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    All you do the whole of your life is circle around a point?
    I do? What point is that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    We humans behave the same way our planet does, how could we not when we are made from the by the same laws that governs the planet. We are in ourselves like magnets attracting one another and influencing one another.
    Do what now?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I agree somewhat, however, I think we use force more today that ever before. As I see it science is not the peoples science, it is a secret language that the majority of people do not understand. Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    What?! To be involved in the sciences you don't have to know a secret handshake. We're not the Freemasons. I got involved by first being interested and then pursuing academics in science. That's it. Everything about science is out there in the open for the public to examine freely.

    What I have seen you complain about most often is that your particular brand of pseudo-science is not accepted as mainstream. That is a much different issue.
    PhDemon likes this.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #151  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by scoobydoo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    Just like how mathematics became a tool for dictatorship and mathematical genocide?

    I knew it! Calculus and algebra are tools for oppression, but no one believed me!
    It does not have to be, yet it can become just that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #152  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I am not wrong, most people on the planet do not understand the scientific method and cannot follow it.
    Even if we accept this unsupported claim, it is their choice. Science hasn't imposed ignorance on them.

    If this is not a peoples thing but only belonging to a chosen few, this could lead to scientific dictatorship and consequently genocide.
    As anyone can choose to learn science (and there are many experts willing to help them) then it doesn't belong to the "chosen few". After all, the "chosen few" made the choice to learn, themselves. Nothing is stopping you, or anyone else, following them.

    I don't even know what "scientific dictatorship" means. Dictators are interested in personal power and wealth, not science.
    I think what you are not understanding is the fact that when you think with people in mind the outcome is quite different than when you think with a chosen few in mind. The atomic weapon was thought of with people in mind, so it can take out as many as it was designed for.

    The tools dictators mainly turn to is the tools that the masses do not understand. I do not hope for a minute that you think science as we now know it could not turn on you as we already surmise it could be doing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #153  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I do not hope for a minute that you think science as we now know it could not turn on you as we already surmise it could be doing.
    Science has no will. Science has no inherent good/evil quality. Nuclear fission, for instance, is not evil. Using it to incinerate people could be judged that way if one so chose.

    I don't like that you personify science.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #154  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    The 'chosen few' chose themselves, by getting an education.

    You could try that, but I'm not sure it would work for you.
    RedPanda, Dywyddyr and PhDemon like this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #155  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think what you are not understanding is the fact that when you think with people in mind the outcome is quite different than when you think with a chosen few in mind.
    I don't think you know what science is, or how it works. (I sometimes wonder if you know what thought is.)

    The tools dictators mainly turn to is the tools that the masses do not understand.
    In the case of science, the mass can learn to understand it.

    Please explain your assertion that scientific knowledge is restricted to the "chosen few". If you cannot justify this, then please admit you are mistaken (or lying).

    I do not hope for a minute that you think science as we now know it could not turn on you as we already surmise it could be doing.
    Who is the "we" that surmise this? On what basis do you reach that conclusion? Which scientists do you think are conspiring against you? What harm is being done to you? Are scientists injecting these irrational thoughts into your brain?
    PhDemon likes this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #156  
    Forum Professor scoobydoo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,240
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scoobydoo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Using science in this way can become a tool for dictatorship and scientific genocide.
    Just like how mathematics became a tool for dictatorship and mathematical genocide?

    I knew it! Calculus and algebra are tools for oppression, but no one believed me!
    It does not have to be, yet it can become just that.
    QFFR pending a possible psychiatric assessment on your sanity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #157  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by scoobydoo1 View Post
    I knew it! Calculus and algebra are tools for oppression, but no one believed me!
    It does not have to be, yet it can become just that.
    You might as well claim that carpentry is a weapon of mass destruction. Or that clowns are plotting to take over the world.

    (Actually, looking at some of the things going on, that last one might be true.)
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #158  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    IThe tools dictators mainly turn to is the tools that the masses do not understand.
    In the case of science, the mass can learn to understand it.

    Please explain your assertion that scientific knowledge is restricted to the "chosen few". If you cannot justify this, then please admit you are mistaken (or lying).
    Most of the population is math illiterate. Not entirely by choice, and not entirely by design, and not entirely by any failure of the educational system. But instead by genetics. The ability to be good at math is an inborn genetic trait, just as athletic ability is inborn.

    You can cultivate it to a degree, and improve on what you start with, but just as there are very few people who could ever be Shaquille O'Neil, there are very few people who could ever become Niels Bohr or Albert Einstein.

    Growing up in a religious community I have met quite a lot of dumb people, and I've seen how hard they worked at it. I've also won math contests myself while getting an F in my actual math courses (due to failure to do my homework.) I'm quite certain my advantage over those other kids was 100% genetic and had absolutely nothing at all to do with my work ethic. And as arrogant as what I just said sounds...... the knowledge that I didn't work to achieve it has always humbled me a little bit, since it means I know I don't deserve it. If I had earned it, I would feel a bit more entitled to my victories.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #159  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Most of the population is math illiterate. Not entirely by choice, and not entirely by design, and not entirely by any failure of the educational system. But instead by genetics. The ability to be good at math is an inborn genetic trait, just as athletic ability is inborn.
    Do you have a reference for that? I haven't heard that before. I'm sure there is a genetic component (there is in most things) but you make it sound like it is purely genetically determined.

    But even if it were, I still don't see how a dictatorship is going to oppress their citizens with differential equations. Especially when the traditional methods of secret police, torture, propaganda, etc. are so well established (and, from their point of view, so much more fun).
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #160  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    There is an equivalent thread on another forum about "proof of UFOs". That has been going on for nearly a year with no agreement of what would be convincing. SO I guess this one is doomed to run and run, as well.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #161  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Most of the population is math illiterate. Not entirely by choice, and not entirely by design, and not entirely by any failure of the educational system. But instead by genetics. The ability to be good at math is an inborn genetic trait, just as athletic ability is inborn.
    So what?
    "Not good at maths" != "maths illiterate".
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #162  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    71
    Friends Really thank you for your posts .But I think the thread is going in a different direction from where it is supposed to.I don't understand what you all people are talking about Mathis,relativity etc.Please be on the topic.I am going to start a new thread about topic related to atheism.Please help me as you did this time.Thanks a lot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #163  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I became atheist after questioning about religion and as I said I don't know science.I want to ask you that why do we atheist believe the god doesn't exist.Which scientific theory makes us atheist.
    Well, I'm an atheist but science has nothing to do with it. I have faith that deities don't exist. Like, I'll stick to this position regardless of evidence, just as one might stick to any other promise or commitment, or delusion.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #164  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong View Post
    Well, I'm an atheist but science has nothing to do with it. I have faith that deities don't exist. Like, I'll stick to this position regardless of evidence, just as one might stick to any other promise or commitment, or delusion.
    I'll second that. I don't see what science has to do with it. It is a matter of belief or faith.

    There are religious and atheist scientists. There are religious people and atheists who know nothing of science.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #165  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    71
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #166  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by pineapples View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    Ok do you all believe in any other type of supernatural powers like do you all believe in spirits, Jinns etc ?
    I’ve seen enough ghosts on youtube to convince me that they don’t exist.

    Also, the supernatural term is nonsensical. If an apparently supernatural event occurs in nature then, it’s no longer supernatural, but a natural event that can be studied.
    lol@youtube ghosts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #167  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Cool, don't go pinching other peoples ideas though eh?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #168  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    That seems futile. Surely the whole point of religious faith is that it doesn't depend on science. That is why it is called "faith".
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #169  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    That seems futile. Surely the whole point of religious faith is that it doesn't depend on science. That is why it is called "faith".

    I never understood why people have been trying to prove the existence of their god(s) or the correctness of their religious doctrines for several centuries.
    If you have faith, why do you need evidence for? If you have evidence, why do you need faith for? Those two concepts seem mutually exclusive.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #170  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    That seems futile. Surely the whole point of religious faith is that it doesn't depend on science. That is why it is called "faith".
    I'd think it was useful to have both faith and evidence.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #171  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I'd think it was useful to have both faith and evidence.
    Useful how? If you are looking for scientific evidence to support your belief then your faith must be rather weak.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #172  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I'd think it was useful to have both faith and evidence.
    Useful how? If you are looking for scientific evidence to support your belief then your faith must be rather weak.
    Well you tell me how or where you can get a strong faith then? Where does faith come from?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #173  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Well you tell me how or where you can get a strong faith then? Where does faith come from?
    I'm probably not the best person to ask. But there are quite a few people of faith on the forum. Maybe one of them can tell you. (I guess they will tell you it comes from their god, or maybe deep inside. But I'm guessing.)
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #174  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickle.
    Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".
    Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #175  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickel.
    Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".
    Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    Are you a scientist?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #176  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickel.
    Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".
    Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    Are you a scientist?
    No. He's a duck. I have heard that there will be a culling near his area soon. He may want to find pastures new.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #177  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Aaand that's relevant how?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #178  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickel.
    Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".
    Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    Are you a scientist?
    How is that relevant?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #179  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickel.
    Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".
    Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    Are you a scientist?
    How is that relevant?
    A scientist, is in my opinion, likely to believe. I know Dywyddyr isn't a believer but he doesn't often express scientific facts, but more often just argues logic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  80. #180  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    The 'chosen few' chose themselves, by getting an education.

    You could try that, but I'm not sure it would work for you.
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  81. #181  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    A scientist, is in my opinion, likely to believe.
    Interesting. Why do you think that?

    I would have thought religious belief was independent of being a scientist or not.

    But it seems we are both wrong:
    Many studies have been conducted in the United States and have generally found that scientists are less likely to believe in God than are the rest of the population.
    Relationship between religion and science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  82. #182  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    It would be better for you if you supplied some support for your ridiculous claims.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  83. #183  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawman View Post
    I am researching religion with help of science and will believe only after enough research.
    Then you're in a bit of a pickel.Science can tell you about religion (i.e. the practise itself) but it can't tell you anything about "god".Science is highly unlikely to lead to belief.
    Are you a scientist?
    How is that relevant?
    A scientist, is in my opinion, likely to believe. I know Dywyddyr isn't a believer but he doesn't often express scientific facts, but more often just argues logic.
    What kind of scientist and why on Earth would we be more likely to believe in God than any other person?
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  84. #184  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    It would be better for you if you supplied some support for your ridiculous claims.
    Strange my man, you are very supportive of the helpless. Why don't you let him answer for himself? I am hoping the brain in his feet is still giving him some sort of support.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  85. #185  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    It would be better for you if you supplied some support for your ridiculous claims.
    I see Stargate has resorted to trolling when his nonsense is pointed out... Again...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  86. #186  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    A scientist, is in my opinion, likely to believe.
    Not supported by the facts.

    Why are so Many of Scientists Atheists? | POPSUGAR Social
    Biological/Medical Field: 32% believe in "God", another 19% don't believe in "God" but believe in a "Higher Power", and 41% do not believe in either.
    Chemistry: 41% believe in "God", another 14% don't believe in "God" but believe in a "Higher Power", and 39% do not believe in either.
    Geoscience: 30% believe in "God", another 20% don't believe in "God" but believe in a "Higher Power", and 47% do not believe in either.
    Physics/Astronomy: 29% believe in "God", another 14% don't believe in "God" but believe in a "Higher Power", and 46% do not believe in either.
    (Mind you, this is for the US, I suspect that Europe would show a higher proportion to the right of that chart...)

    Or even...
    Among the members of the National Academy of Sciences, 7% believed in God, 72.2% did not, and 20.8% were agnostic or had doubts.

    I know Dywyddyr isn't a believer but he doesn't often express scientific facts, but more often just argues logic.
    A) Then you should read more of my posts.
    B) Because "scientific facts" are only a Google search away. I "argue logic" in an attempt to get people into thinking 1. Which just happens to be one of the foundational elements of science.
    C) Like I, and Strange, said it's hardly relevant but, yes, by a number of criteria I am (or was) "a scientist".

    1 Or dissuade them from not thinking.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  87. #187  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Strange my man, you are very supportive of the helpless
    I am trying to help you by pointing out that you have repeatedly claimed that science is some sort of weapon of repression, which is obviously not true.

    Despite the obvious errors in your claim being pointed out, you simply repeat it.

    So again, please admit you are wrong and stop repeating false claims.
    KALSTER and PhDemon like this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  88. #188  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Strange my man, you are very supportive of the helpless
    I am trying to help you by pointing out that you have repeatedly claimed that science is some sort of weapon of repression, which is obviously not true.

    Despite the obvious errors in your claim being pointed out, you simply repeat it.

    So again, please admit you are wrong and stop repeating false claims.
    Does a piece of stone have memory? Does water have memory?
    No Strange, not so at all, but let me explain it so you can understand what you fail to grasp. Science is dangerous when the masses do not understand how it works. In the final analysis dictators use the tools that people do not understand to cause pain and suffering depending on what they think is right. You keep making the mistake to think I do not have the right to say what I say. But I have also been on the planet much the same as you have, I have my story to tell regardless of how much you think you know. Please tell me that dictators do not operate the way I am saying, and that science can be a tool for war on the people if they do not understand it and can comprehend where its going.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  89. #189  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    [No Strange, not so at all, but let me explain it so you can understand what you fail to grasp.
    And let me point out some of your false claims, that there is no reason to accept because you provide no evidence. As you keep repeating them, despite them being untrue, you are now deliberately lying.

    Science is dangerous when the masses do not understand how it works.
    Evidence required that:
    (a) science is dangerous and
    (b) it is more dangerous if some people choose not to understand it

    In the final analysis dictators use the tools that people do not understand to cause pain and suffering depending on what they think is right.
    Evidence required that
    (a) dictators use tools people do not understand (I am sure that dictators make sure that the people know very well that they are being watched and are likely to be tortued or killed).
    (b) science can be used by dictators for this purpose

    You keep making the mistake to think I do not have the right to say what I say.
    Wrong. You obviously have the right to say it (while the moderators allow it). However, this is a science forum and therefore obviously untrue statements will be challenged. If you cannot provide any evidence you should stop making false statements.

    Please tell me that dictators do not operate the way I am saying, and that science can be a tool for war on the people if they do not understand it and can comprehend where its going.
    1. I have told you this repeatedly. You have chosen to ignore it, which is both dishonest and rude.

    2. It is your claim, you need to support it. (Or withdraw it.)

    As you are famous for talking nonsense and saying things that are clearly not true, I will not accept these claims of yours without ... wait for it ... evidence.
    pavlos, Paleoichneum and PhDemon like this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  90. #190  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    [No Strange, not so at all, but let me explain it so you can understand what you fail to grasp.
    And let me point out some of your false claims, that there is no reason to accept because you provide no evidence. As you keep repeating them, despite them being untrue, you are now deliberately lying.

    Science is dangerous when the masses do not understand how it works.
    Evidence required that:
    (a) science is dangerous and
    (b) it is more dangerous if some people choose not to understand it

    In the final analysis dictators use the tools that people do not understand to cause pain and suffering depending on what they think is right.
    Evidence required that
    (a) dictators use tools people do not understand (I am sure that dictators make sure that the people know very well that they are being watched and are likely to be tortued or killed).
    (b) science can be used by dictators for this purpose

    You keep making the mistake to think I do not have the right to say what I say.
    Wrong. You obviously have the right to say it (while the moderators allow it). However, this is a science forum and therefore obviously untrue statements will be challenged. If you cannot provide any evidence you should stop making false statements.

    Please tell me that dictators do not operate the way I am saying, and that science can be a tool for war on the people if they do not understand it and can comprehend where its going.
    1. I have told you this repeatedly. You have chosen to ignore it, which is both dishonest and rude.

    2. It is your claim, you need to support it. (Or withdraw it.)

    As you are famous for talking nonsense and saying things that are clearly not true, I will not accept these claims of yours without ... wait for it ... evidence.
    I cannot see how I should provide evidence when it is my opinion that science could be used to manipulate people, I did not say it is happening as yet. No one understood the consequences of the rockets Hitler used in the second world war, today we put atomic bombs on the rockets and fire them into peoples back yards, that is evidence enough, although I am sure you are going to reject it because that is your game.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  91. #191  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Science is dangerous when the masses do not understand how it works.
    A) Balls.
    B) If that were actually true then, in short, it's their own f*cking fault.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  92. #192  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,758
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    No one understood the consequences of the rockets Hitler used in the second world war
    Pure drivel.
    The reason they were used was because of the foreseen "consequences"
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  93. #193  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I cannot see how I should provide evidence when it is my opinion that science could be used to manipulate people
    Then there is no reason for anyone to believe you. <shrug>

    Also, you have failed to answer the point that science is open and available to anyone.

    No one understood the consequences of the rockets Hitler used in the second world war, today we put atomic bombs on the rockets and fire them into peoples back yards, that is evidence enough, although I am sure you are going to reject it because that is your game.
    1. No one fires atomic bombs (into people's backyards or anywhere else).

    2. That is nothing to do with science. It is politics (assisted by technology). As with most things, some scientists will think it is a good idea, some will think it is a bad idea and some will think it is very complicated. Science has no opinion.
    adelady and MrMojo1 like this.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  94. #194  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    It would be better for you if you supplied some support for your ridiculous claims.
    Strange my man, you are very supportive of the helpless. Why don't you let him answer for himself? I am hoping the brain in his feet is still giving him some sort of support.
    Your educational level appears to be that of a high school dropout. Your knowledge of science is non-existent. Your reaction to science appears to be that of fear and intimidation. If you had stayed in school and paid attention to what you were being taught, instead of playing video games and watching TV, you too could be one of the 'chosen'.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  95. #195  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Stargate View Post
    I think it would work for you if you removed the brain from your feet to your head. On the other hand, maybe you do not have A BRAIN IN YOUR FEET, that would be quite sad for your followers.
    It would be better for you if you supplied some support for your ridiculous claims.
    Strange my man, you are very supportive of the helpless. Why don't you let him answer for himself? I am hoping the brain in his feet is still giving him some sort of support.
    Your educational level appears to be that of a high school dropout. Your knowledge of science is non-existent. Your reaction to science appears to be that of fear and intimidation. If you had stayed in school and paid attention to what you were being taught, instead of playing video games and watching TV, you too could be one of the 'chosen'.
    If you are what the classroom turned out I am glad I remained a dunce. I do not play games period. I do very well thank you, I have my own business, I have my own home, I also have a very creative family and I am filled, I do not ask anymore of life even if you think I was a drop out. I do not even have a TV, and thank you if you are a chosen one I am wondering who choose you? There was a deliberate mistake. You sound like a simpleton and every now and then Strange has to come and bail you out. You see at least Strange is clever and benevolent at the same time and you should be grateful you have him on your side.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  96. #196  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    If you are what the classroom turned out I am glad I remained a dunce.
    If you're happy being stupid, you're going the right way.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  97. #197  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,034
    Oh noes.

    Shoolyard fight!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  98. #198  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    If you are what the classroom turned out I am glad I remained a dunce.
    If you're happy being stupid, you're going the right way.
    Don't be so afraid, you should have realized by now that I am joining you in wearing the dunce cap. I hope Strange has not realized that as yet, or he will be running to your rescue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  99. #199  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Beer w/Straw View Post
    Oh noes.

    Shoolyard fight!
    No you know, The fights of the fools, we fight even when there is nothing to fight about. I do not want any simple fool to come and take my title away. The really funny parts is I am having the time of my life, and I suspect some of my fool friend, friends.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  100. #200  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    A scientist, is in my opinion, likely to believe.
    Interesting. Why do you think that?

    I would have thought religious belief was independent of being a scientist or not.

    But it seems we are both wrong:
    Many studies have been conducted in the United States and have generally found that scientists are less likely to believe in God than are the rest of the population.
    Relationship between religion and science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    I would still say a scientist who believes is a lot more believable than a scientific atheist who says he doesn't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New member sends his greetings
    By citizenzen in forum Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 1st, 2014, 06:37 PM
  2. U.S. sends B-2 bombers to South Korea
    By cosmictraveler in forum In the News
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: June 27th, 2013, 06:12 AM
  3. An Atheist Meets God
    By verzen in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 12th, 2008, 04:58 PM
  4. However, the “Game Over” sign is about to go on.
    By newcastle in forum Business & Economics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 9th, 2008, 12:08 AM
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
  •