Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Deicide on August 26, 2008, 08:50:21 AM
-
-
This kind of debate always making me laugh.
Reason? Wahahahahhahah Thats a RELIGION or SUPERSTITION called REASON!
-
BEST PROGRAM EVER!
EVERYBODY SHOULD OWN OR WATCH IT!
His new one about Darwin is awesome as well.
-
This kind of debate always making me laugh.
Reason? Wahahahahhahah Thats a RELIGION or SUPERSTITION called REASON!
Uhmm....no.
-
Uhmm....no.
Ok. My friend.
Explain to you.
All the reason is constructed with certain concept made of a defenition.
For example, before the quantum theory of now a day, nobody belived in uncertain principle and everybody was believeing in Newton physic which is every move is certain and precise in this universe.
So automaticaly every physics theorys of that days are made from the base of Newton physic that the scientists of now a day deny 100%.
And that old science is like a SUPERSTICION for the present scientists.
From this reason, esoteric magic was believed as the science of that epoc.
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=405018828&blogID=425221436&MyToken=d4cc5466-afec-4f48-a8e6-f5f14938beee
One day, our reason, science will be called supersticon.
Look. Everything is changing and NOT EVOLUTION.
-
Ok. My friend.
Explain to you.
All the reason is constructed with certain concept made of a defenition.
For example, before the quantum theory of now a day, nobody belived in uncertain principle and everybody was believeing in Newton physic which is every move is certain and precise in this universe.
So automaticaly every physics theorys of that days are made from the base of Newton physic that the scientists of now a day deny 100%.
And that old science is like a SUPERSTICION for the present scientists.
From this reason, esoteric magic was believed as the science of that epoc.
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=405018828&blogID=425221436&MyToken=d4cc5466-afec-4f48-a8e6-f5f14938beee
One day, our reason, science will be called supersticon.
Look. Everything is changing and NOT EVOLUTION.
Experts in Quantum Theory, that is real physicists have trouble grasping it; for this reason whenever laypeople begin to talk about it I know they are talking bullshit.
-
Ha ha ha ha..I love Dawkins and agree with everything he says, but he gets way too upset by stupid people and their stupidity. He should just stop trying to make stupid people realize how stupid they are, and let them live their lives stupidly. Intelligence is genetic after all, and trying to make dummies analyse reality like scientists is self-defeating.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Ha ha ha ha..I love Dawkins and agree with everything he says, but he gets way too upset by stupid people and their stupidity. He should just stop trying to make stupid people realize how stupid they are, and let them live their lives stupidly. Intelligence is genetic after all, and trying to make dummies analyse reality like scientists is self-defeating.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Why do you insist on signing every post?
-
Why do you insist on signing every post?
I have already addressed this issue before.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I have already addressed this issue before.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Please provide the relevant link to your addressing of this issue.
DEICIDE
-
You guys are funny. We get it. You don't believe in God. Where you're wrong is assuming everyone who does is stupid, and that's your overriding point. Your opinion is countered by many who have the opposite view and quite honestly the average atheist looks pretty stupid to them. It's easy to trot out just as many genius's who believe in God as those who don't. Bottom line is, you don't really know anything for sure do you?
-
Please provide the relevant link to your addressing of this issue.
DEICIDE
It happened years ago. Establishing a link is not possible, since the thread where the issue was addressed was not archived in the database.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
You guys are funny. We get it. You don't believe in God. Where you're wrong is assuming everyone who does is stupid, and that's your overriding point. Your opinion is countered by many who have the opposite view and quite honestly the average atheist looks pretty stupid to them. It's easy to trot out just as many genius's who believe in God as those who don't. Bottom line is, you don't really know anything for sure do you?
Hardly. 95% of the members of the national academy of sciences are atheists, e.g.
-
Hardly. 95% of the members of the national academy of sciences are atheists, e.g.
You don't know that.........and if it were true, it doesn't mean there is no God. I really don't want to go any further with this, bottom line is you don't know anything for sure do you. ( Derogatory response to follow....watch )
-
You guys are funny. We get it. You don't believe in God. Where you're wrong is assuming everyone who does is stupid, and that's your overriding point. Your opinion is countered by many who have the opposite view and quite honestly the average atheist looks pretty stupid to them. It's easy to trot out just as many genius's who believe in God as those who don't. Bottom line is, you don't really know anything for sure do you?
The overriding point is that believing in something in faifth value can be used for many other things besides God. For instance, I can claim that there are fairies that exist in a parallel dimension, and if you asked me for proof I could simply claim that it is a matter of faifth, and that the dimension that the fairies inhabit is not composed of either matter or energy, meaning that there is not way get evidence for their existence since any evidence must be, a priori, something that involves either matter or energy since only matter and energy can exist in our Universe - so, since the evidence for the existence of the fairies cannot exist in our Universe, then you can't disprove my claim that the fairies exist for lack of evidence. Understand? As for scientists who believe in God, some do, but most are agnostic. The laws of physics break down when trying to explain the origin of the Bing Bang, so some scientists make concession and admit that there is something that transcends physics and even perhaps logic, and are thus agnostic but seldom theistic. Nevertheless, most scientists are indeed atheists, and most people at the higher percentiles of intelligence are too.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
For those of you who like to read and don't have time to watch 10 video clips: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enemies_of_Reason (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enemies_of_Reason).
-
The overriding point is that believing in something in faifth value can be used for many other things besides God. For instance, I can claim that there are fairies that exist in a parallel dimension, and if you asked me for proof I could simply claim that it is a matter of faifth, and that the dimension that the fairies inhabit is not composed of either matter or energy, meaning that there is not way get evidence for their existence since any evidence must be, a priori, something that involves either matter or energy since only matter and energy can exist in our Universe - so, since the evidence for the existence of the fairies cannot exist in our Universe, then you can't disprove my claim that the fairies exist for lack of evidence. Understand? As for scientists who believe in God, some do, but most are agnostic. The laws of physics break down when trying to explain the origin of the Bing Bang, so some scientists make concession and admit that there is something that transcends physics and even perhaps logic, and are thus agnostic but seldom theistic. Nevertheless, most scientists are indeed atheists, and most people at the higher percentiles of intelligence are too.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Painting a picture of a person who blieves in God as backward and stupid can be countered by the picture of your average atheist with the high I.Q. ( as you say), wearing a ponytail, a borderline anarchist, having all the answers but jobless and maybe a professional street protestor. Hardly the picture of reason. Extreme, but not more extreme as your view of those who are religious.
-
I have already addressed this issue before.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
FUCK YOU
-
Yes, yes, science is better than superstition. The rest of his gibberish is just delusion of grandeur on his side. Someone who honestly thinks he can critique religion with such unbelievably simple-mined platitudes just can't be taken seriously.
-
FUCK YOU
Ha ha ha...what an angry retard. Are you having your period, honey?
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Yes, yes, science is better than superstition. The rest of his gibberish is just delusion of grandeur on his side. Someone who honestly thinks he can critique religion with such unbelievably simple-mined platitudes just can't be taken seriously.
They dont know the science is the kind of a religion also. ;D
-
Yes, yes, science is better than superstition. The rest of his gibberish is just delusion of grandeur on his side. Someone who honestly thinks he can critique religion with such unbelievably simple-mined platitudes just can't be taken seriously.
So could you finally define what it is you believe?
Glaubst Du an die Wuenschelrute?
-
They dont know the science is the kind of a religion also. ;D
Science in its pure form is not religion. Unfortunally, many scientists elevate science to an ideology, which they think can compete with religion.
-
You don't know that.........and if it were true, it doesn't mean there is no God. I really don't want to go any further with this, bottom line is you don't know anything for sure do you. ( Derogatory response to follow....watch )
They were surveryed. You think they were lying?
By your rationale, we don't really know anything.
-
They dont know the science is the kind of a religion also. ;D
no it's not. science is allways backed up by studies, observations and facts!
unlike religion which is nothing more than mythology.
i thought you where brighter than this kyomu..
-
Ha ha ha ha..I love Dawkins and agree with everything he says, but he gets way too upset by stupid people and their stupidity. He should just stop trying to make stupid people realize how stupid they are, and let them live their lives stupidly. Intelligence is genetic after all, and trying to make dummies analyse reality like scientists is self-defeating.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Wrong. Critical thinking is a skill that can be taught, and even though some maybe be better at it than others, it doesn't mean that Dawkins shouldn't try.
-
Science in its pure form is not religion. Unfortunally, many scientists elevate science to an ideology, which they think can compete with religion.
Right. Atitude is different.
-
So could you finally define what it is you believe?
That's off-topic. It's not necessary to state what I believe in to show the obvious flaws in Dawkins' arguments. As I have said many times, first we have to get the obvious obstacles out of the way. Otherwise we will always talk at cross-purposes.
Glaubst Du an die Wuenschelruete?
I already said that I agree with Dawkins that science is better than superstition. It's just the rest that's garbage.
-
no it's not. science is allways backed up by studies, observations and facts!
unlike religion which is nothing more than mythology.
i thought you where brighter than this kyomu..
Until that science and those facts are later proven as wrong. People quickly forget how much science changes and what we once believe as 100% truth, later on is proven as false.
I'm not a fan of organized religion, the "Church" has poisoned and twisted much of it (not just in Christianity) and the fanatics on both sides make it very unappealing to me. But I do believe in something greater than us and that there are many things our simple minds still cannot comprehend.
In the cosmic sense of it all, why does it matter so much to some people what other people choose or choose not to believe? Does it really matter? If you are that shallow to ignore the other aspects of what a human being has to offer just because his beliefs differ from your own, then you are no better than those that you oppose so vehemently.
-
That's off-topic. It's not necessary to state what I believe in to show the obvious flaws in Dawkins' arguments. As I have said many times, first we have to get the obvious obstacles out of the way. Otherwise we will always talk at cross-purposes.
I already said that I agree with Dawkins that science is better than superstition. It's just the rest that's garbage.
The problem is, as always, that your solution is naught but mental masturbation with no end game in sight.
-
How come you guys are too BLIND to notice that any FACT or STUDY begin with a PREJUDICE?
-
Wrong. Critical thinking is a skill that can be taught, and even though some maybe be better at it than others, it doesn't mean that Dawkins shouldn't try.
The ability to understand things require the ability to make logical inferences and deductions, and many people are severely lacking in that. People at the lower percentiles of intlligence will never understand the sequence of events that resulted in the current organization of reality, from how biological systems arose and evolved to how the laws of physics organize the Universe and predicts the behavior of particles for instance, which allows us to performe chemical synthesis as well as creating, for instance, computers. You can't teach critical thinking skills to someone who's ability to think is severely limited. So you have shot yourself in the proverbial foot and is wrong - as usual, I might add. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Until that science and those facts are later proven as wrong. People quickly forget how much science changes and what we once believe as 100% truth, later on is proven as false.
yes but then corrected with new facts.
trial and error. such is life.
but i recognise that for some people the world is hard to understand so they turn to religion/mythology/spiritualism because it's easier to understand. god created everything. there, now you can sleep well. lol....
-
The problem is, as always, that your solution is naught but mental masturbation with no end game in sight.
I don't understand your logic. I can easily prove wrong just about everthing Dawkins stands for. Still you choose to follow his simplistic world-view because I cannot provide you with anything better as long as you choose to do so. It just makes no sense to me.
-
but i recognise that for some people the world is hard to understand so they turn to religion/mythology/spiritualism because it's easier to understand. god created everything. there, now you can sleep well. lol....
What exactly is hard to understand about the scientific principle? It's one of the easiest methods there is.
-
I don't understand your logic. I can easily prove wrong just about everthing Dawkins stands for. Still you choose to follow his simplistic world-view because I cannot provide you with anything better as long as you choose to do so. It just makes no sense to me.
The main point we disagree about is the implications that certain scientific theories have as well as the very structure and nature of the universe having implications as well; you often talk about Ego but if you were to look at the universe in all its immensity, you would see just how small you and I are; these observational facts have profound implications on humanity's world view. We are but specks of dust in an infinitely vaster universe, do you deny this?
-
The main point we disagree about is the implications that certain scientific theories have as well as the very structure and nature of the universe having implications as well;
Terms again lack clarity. The very structure and nature of the universe of course has implications. But science tells you nothing about the very structure and nature of the universe.
you often talk about Ego but if you were to look at the universe in all its immensity, you would see just how small you and I are; these observational facts have profound implications on humanity's world view. We are but specks of dust in an infinitely vaster universe, do you deny this?
Of course not. My unimportance however does not stem from any scientific observations. The vastness of the universe goes way beyond its scientific aspects. No wonder however, that it even represents itself in this way.
-
The ability to understand things require the ability to make logical inferences and deductions, and many people are severely lacking in that. People at the lower percentiles of intlligence will never understand the sequence of events that resulted in the current organization of reality, from how biological systems arose and evolved to how the laws of physics organize the Universe and predicts the behavior of particles for instance, which allows us to performe chemical synthesis as well as creating, for instance, computers. You can't teach critical thinking skills to someone who's ability to think is severely limited. So you have shot yourself in the proverbial foot and is wrong - as usual, I might add. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
No one is going to suck your "muscle" you self impotrant little twat.
STOP WRITING SUCKMYMUSCLE AFTER EVERY FUCKING POST. >:(
You have been warned. 8)
-
Terms again lack clarity. The very structure and nature of the universe of course has implications. But science tells you nothing about the very structure and nature of the universe.
so how does religion explain it better? maybe you can tell us before criticizing science which is the foundation of every modern aspect of society today, aswell as the computer you type on at this very moment ;)
-
so how does religion explain it better? maybe you can tell us before criticizing science which is the foundation of every modern aspect of society today, aswell as the computer you type on at this very moment ;)
Believe me, with Wavelength, it is a losing battle. :-\
And not because his arguments pertaining to this topic are good.
-
so how does religion explain it better? maybe you can tell us before criticizing science which is the foundation of every modern aspect of society today, aswell as the computer you type on at this very moment ;)
That's not the point. The point is that the scientific description of the world does not compete with a philosophical or spiritual explanation of it. Simply because, science by definition is restricted to the scientific aspects of the world.
-
Believe me, with Wavelength, it is a losing battle. :-\
And not because his arguments pertaining to this topic are good.
My definition of a good argument is one I can't challenge.
-
Science trumps religion for the simple reason that it can be scrutenized. Scientific knowledge expands and improves in cycles by new evidence. Religion apparantly is an undeniable truth, it can not advance therefor and is outside the realm of reason. Religion can't question or reflect on itself, and if anything, those evaluating qualities is what sets mankind apart form anything else.
-
My definition of a good argument is one I can't challenge.
Yes...I am well aware. ::)
-
No one is going to suck your "muscle" you self impotrant little twat.
STOP WRITING SUCKMYMUSCLE AFTER EVERY FUCKING POST. >:(
You have been warned. 8)
Buy a new brand of tampoons, honey, because the one you're wearing now is obviously making you cranky...
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Science trumps religion for the simple reason that it can be scrutinized. Scientific knowledge expands and improves in cycles by new evidence. Religion apparantly is an undeniable truth, it can not advance therefor and is outside the realm of reason. Religion can't question or reflect on itself, and if anything, those evaluating qualities is what sets mankind apart form anything else.
Good post. Science has a corrective mechanism to discard old theories when their validity expires. Science is always working /advancing to improve itself.
Sorry Top Dog - Science never claims that it has all the answers. Neither do atheists. We are however working towards bettering ourselves by looking for those answers rather than accept things just based on "faith" and primitive superstitions.
-
Good post. Science has a corrective mechanism to discard old theories when their validity expires. Science is always working /advancing to improve itself.
Sorry Top Dog - Science never claims that it has all the answers. Neither do atheists. We are however working towards bettering ourselves by looking for for those answers rather than accept things just based on "faith" and primitive superstitions.
Well said.... :)
-
There's not an oiled up guy anywhere in this thread, Ron is going to be pissed off.