Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Roger Bacon on April 15, 2012, 01:58:29 PM
-
Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups in a 32-question survey of religious knowledge by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. On average, Americans got 16 of the 32 questions correct. Atheists and agnostics got an average of 20.9 correct answers. Jews (20.5) and Mormons (20.3). Protestants got 16 correct answers on average, while Catholics got 14.7 questions right.
How will you do on the quiz?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0105/Are-you-smarter-than-an-atheist-A-religious-quiz/When-does-the-Jewish-Sabbath-begin
Got 24, I most closely identify with Judaism I guess. (No Jew)
-
I got 29 correct, and I am not religious.
-
32 out of 32 and I have NEVER been to church in my life, have always been an atheist and I hate all religions and think they are all for morons. Easy Quiz.
-
29/32... not bad. also an atheist. 8)
-
32 out of 32 and I have NEVER been to church in my life, have always been an atheist and I hate all religions and think they are all for morons. Easy Quiz.
Just curious Adonis, say you got hit in the head and lost your marbles.... What religion would you identify most closely with?
-
Just curious Adonis, say you got hit in the head and lost your marbles.... What religion would you identify most closely with?
None. I could never trade my rationality and reason for stupidity and ignorance.
-
30 out 32 8)
Atheist needless to say
-
don't even bother to do it
religion is only for fools
-
29
-
don't even bother to do it
religion is only for fools
x2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
26 out of 32.
Not too bad considering I'm not religious. Most of it is just stuff you learn at school.
-
27
-
Err ... before I even take this "test," how is someone "smarter than an atheist" if he/she knows much about religion? That's a stupid metric. I don't know much about Jewish or Catholic pomp and circumstance, and I know for a fact I'm smarter than some atheists, Jews, Christians, Buddhists and Muslims. According to this test, however, that someone knows Jews celebrate X on Y day means they're "smarter" than me.
Again, stupid. Someone knows a handful of things I do not; then, ipso presto, they're smarter? LOL. Look up the "hasty generalization" fallacy.
Besides, the ability to retain factoids isn't a proper measure of intellect. That's more the stuff of the ability to learn and adapt than anything else.
-
Relax stud....
Just an online quiz.....
-
32 out of 32 and I have NEVER been to church in my life, have always been an atheist and I hate all religions and think they are all for morons. Easy Quiz.
Yet you answered every question correctly......seems you know quite a bit about religions.
24/32
-
I thought "nirvana" was Hindu. Dumbass.
-
Yet you answered every question correctly......seems you know quite a bit about religions.
24/32
Of course I do. I read voraciously. I am shocked that people would score low on this no matter what their religious beliefs may be. Most of this stuff can be picked up by just being alive.
-
Of course I do. I read voraciously. I am shocked that people would score low on this no matter what their religious beliefs may be. Most of this stuff can be picked up by just being alive.
Why does getbig attract so many individuals of above average intelligence? ???
-
Of course I do. I read voraciously. I am shocked that people would score low on this no matter what their religious beliefs may be. Most of this stuff can be picked up by just being alive.
Have you actually read these "holy books" for each religion?
-
Why does getbig attract so many individuals of above average intelligence? ???
Because we've conquered everything else.
Only the strong, physically, mentally, and spiritually, conquer Getbig.
-
I missed 10 I probably need to create my own religion. Religions typically teach the same things just with different gods and characters so if you just do the right thing you are good to go. There wasnt a question about the preacher Jim Jones who talked several hundred people to kill themselves with Cyanide.
-
Have you actually read these "holy books" for each religion?
Nope and neither has the overwhelming majority of people who profess to be religious. Its a waste of time anyways as its very poorly written and the characters are all one-dimensional. Greek Mythology does not fall in that category however and the Greek Myths are actually enjoyable and the character development is quite complex.
-
30/32.. I've been to Catholic School for 16 years of my life lol. However, I would not call myself very religious or some devote Christian. These were pretty easy.. I missed one of the jewish questions and the religious population of Indonesia.
-
30/32.. I've been to Catholic School for 16 years of my life lol. However, I would not call myself very religious or some devote Christian. These were pretty easy.. I missed one of the jewish questions and the religious population of Indonesia.
I missed this one too. I didn't realize Muslims were the majority.
-
I missed this one too. I didn't realize Muslims were the majority.
Thats where Obama got his Muslim education according to the morons.
-
That no-good bastard.
-
32 out of 32 and I have NEVER been to church in my life, have always been an atheist and I hate all religions and think they are all for morons. Easy Quiz.
What's your point? I'm religious and I got them all right too. I went to church all of my life and have always been religious and I love all atheists and think they are all God's children. Easy Quiz.
-
32. I grew up in a particular religion, but have studied many religions and gone to the church / temples of several large and small organizations (some would say cults).
all i know is that if youre a good person, and if there is a heaven youll be there, if not, youll be reincarnated as a 3rd tier IFBB pro
-
25 out of 32, but that was a fucked up test - questions pertaining to the US constittuion, how the hell has that anything to do with religion, actually, there were a few questions there just completely biased to the USA - I find this often with anything American, it is aimed at them and not a universal market - the yanks have trouble imagining there are other countries, they just kinda think maybe they might exist, but just in case, we will pretend we are the only country on the planet. That was a useless test that had very little to do with religion.
Also I am an Agnostic - the truth can not be known with our teeny weeny brains, if it could be known, we would have been given bigger brains.
-
32 easy
-
32 out of 32 and I have NEVER been to church in my life, have always been an atheist and I hate all religions and think they are all for morons. Easy Quiz.
I'm sure your creator is very pleased with your grateful attitude for life.
-
25 out of 32, but that was a fucked up test - questions pertaining to the US constittuion, how the hell has that anything to do with religion, actually, there were a few questions there just completely biased to the USA - I find this often with anything American, it is aimed at them and not a universal market - the yanks have trouble imagining there are other countries, they just kinda think maybe they might exist, but just in case, we will pretend we are the only country on the planet. That was a useless test that had very little to do with religion.
Also I am an Agnostic - the truth can not be known with our teeny weeny brains, if it could be known, we would have been given bigger brains.
You're way superior to those Americans.
That's for sure.
-
Why does getbig attract so many individuals of above average intelligence? ???
This has nothing to do with intelligence.
I am yet to be beaten in IQ test topic :/
I do not care about religion and I think I had most of these questions wrong (couldn't make myself through it whole tho, too boring). Couldn't care less, I prefer watching Iron Man than reading this bullshit.
-
Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups in a 32-question survey of religious knowledge by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. On average, Americans got 16 of the 32 questions correct. Atheists and agnostics got an average of 20.9 correct answers. Jews (20.5) and Mormons (20.3). Protestants got 16 correct answers on average, while Catholics got 14.7 questions right.
How will you do on the quiz?
...
28 out of 32. I am an atheist.
NN
-
26/32
Not that I know much about religion but most were common knowledge and some I knew from taking Civilizations History in college. I am an atheist.
-
28/32 Christian!
-
I would never dream of comparing myself to an atheist or agnostic in terms of any type of knowledge. Most atheists and agnostics already know everything and have read all the important books worth reading.....most have college degrees!!!
-
30/32
-
25/32..... and I'm... oh, nevermind..
-
32/32
Grew up in a Christian environment.
Been agnostic since I was 16.
My girlfriend did 10/32, she's Buddhist and barely speaks English.
8)
-
31/32
Mormonism tripped me up. Rest is simple.
-
Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?
Student : Yes.
Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?
(Student was silent.)
Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Is satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor: Where does satan come from ?
Student : From … GOD …
Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student : Yes.
Professor: So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer.)
Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, who created them ?
(Student had no answer.)
Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?
Student : No, sir.
Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?
Student : No , sir.
Professor: Have you ever felt your GOD, tasted your GOD, smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?
Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.
Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Professor: Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
Professor: Yes.
Student : No, sir. There isn’t.
(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)
Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?
Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?
Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?
Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.
Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)
Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class was in uproar.)
Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?
(The class broke out into laughter. )
Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.
Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.
P.S.
I believe you have enjoyed the conversation. And if so, you’ll probably want your friends / colleagues to enjoy the same, won’t you?
Forward this to increase their knowledge … or FAITH.
By the way, that student was EINSTEIN.
-
Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?
Student : Yes.
Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?
(Student was silent.)
Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Is satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor: Where does satan come from ?
Student : From … GOD …
Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student : Yes.
Professor: So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer.)
Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, who created them ?
(Student had no answer.)
Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?
Student : No, sir.
Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?
Student : No , sir.
Professor: Have you ever felt your GOD, tasted your GOD, smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?
Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.
Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Professor: Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
Professor: Yes.
Student : No, sir. There isn’t.
(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)
Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?
Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?
Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?
Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.
Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)
Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class was in uproar.)
Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?
(The class broke out into laughter. )
Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.
Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.
P.S.
I believe you have enjoyed the conversation. And if so, you’ll probably want your friends / colleagues to enjoy the same, won’t you?
Forward this to increase their knowledge … or FAITH.
By the way, that student was EINSTEIN.
Wow, nice one coach. :)
-
Interesting conversation, but snopes says it wasn't Einstein:
http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp
-
LOL, that story by Coach is utter shit.
-
Interesting conversation, but snopes says it wasn't Einstein:
http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp
Who is Barbara "Nanny and the professor" Mikkleson??? This is context only from someone who doesn't want to believe. This sounds exactly like a professor in college who refuses to teach or explain both sides of the coin. Tell both sides equally and let the student draw their own conclusions about what he or she wants to believe in.
-
LOL, that story by Coach is utter shit.
What part? And can you dispute it?
-
LOL, that story by Coach is utter shit.
Please explain,... ???
-
Einstein didn't believe, Coach. That's all I'm saying. It was probably an anecdote created by someone who just added his name to it.
-
Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?
Student : Yes.
Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?
(Student was silent.)
Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Is satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor: Where does satan come from ?
Student : From … GOD …
Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student : Yes.
Professor: So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer.)
Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, who created them ?
(Student had no answer.)
Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?
Student : No, sir.
Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?
Student : No , sir.
Professor: Have you ever felt your GOD, tasted your GOD, smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?
Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.
Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Professor: Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
Professor: Yes.
Student : No, sir. There isn’t.
(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)
Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?
Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?
Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?
Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.
Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)
Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class was in uproar.)
Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?
(The class broke out into laughter. )
Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.
Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.
P.S.
I believe you have enjoyed the conversation. And if so, you’ll probably want your friends / colleagues to enjoy the same, won’t you?
Forward this to increase their knowledge … or FAITH.
By the way, that student was EINSTEIN.
A bunch of stupid nonsense
-
The STUDENT went terribly wrong when he assumed evolution is only a theory because no-one ever witnessed it. Ever heard of evidence that logically proves certain things without seeing them? Even in LAW we have that. Most murders dont have witnesses BUT through indirect evidence it is 100% logically proven that something happened. Without ever seeing it. Evolution has thousands of fossils that without a doubt make evolution proven. WITHOUT A DOUBT!
Most of complicated science (and most of the things the 'student' is using) are being built by using indirect evidence and through repeated experimentation always arrive at the same conclusion (something religion has never done ONCE, let alone repeated experimentation). So by not being able to see protons and elektrons 'the student a.k.a. religious representative' is saying most machines are just magic! They HAPPEN to work for hundreds of years and past tests by the most critical of minds.
Thats the difference between religion and science. Science is FULL of critical people with critical minds about EVERYTHING!. A theory in science means a body of work, NOT a wild guess like most non-educated and religious people think (over 90% of scientists are agnostic). The ONLY way a theory (body of work) can survive is to pass all possible tests. Tests which are designed to make it FAIL. And they still pass them for hundreds of years! If they fail, they are DESTROYED and this theory is no longer valid.
You can test Einsteins relativity theory through ALL possible ways and try your hardest to make it fail. Until today is has not and thousands of highly educated people have tried. And when it does fail--->no biggie, we accept what we have learned and add the new knowledge to the old one.
Religion is FULL of people with the least amount of criticism. NO experimentation, proof that would withstand childs questions let alone smart rational minds. A simple childs question of 'how did they build the boat dad to put ALL the worlds animals in it (2 of them) and how did they do it in such a short time? NO ANSWER to that has ever been given. No answer to ANY even childish question to anything that the biggest religious CLAIM as truth has EVER been given.
So why do religions and the believers expect to be taken any more seriously then someone believing in Spiderman? Spiderman must be real, I saw it in a book! Only through answering the hardest questions with PROOF can religion be taken seriously and be a part of modern world.
Religion DEPENDS and can only survive if rationale, critical thinking, trial-and-error and ANY kind of logical thinking is ABSOLUTELY ABSENT. Blind belief without any hint of questioning.
The kid didn't assume evolution wasn't a fact cause it wasn't observed, he simply used the professor's argument against him, the professor was the one that suggested anything that hasn't been observed cannot be a fact. He suggested that the kid can't claim God to be a fact cause he has never seen him. I think you should read it again.
-
Ha, Coach is so stupid.
"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)"
"The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously. (Albert Einstein, Letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946)"
Albert Einstein: arch rationalist or scientist with a spiritual core?
A letter being auctioned in London this week adds more fuel to the long-simmering debate about the Nobel Prize-winning (Einstein) physicist's religious views. In the note, written the year before his death, Einstein dismissed the idea of God as the product of human weakness and the Bible as "pretty childish."
-
Bet coach would be a epic fail on this, just like his normal life :)
-
Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups in a 32-question survey of religious knowledge by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. On average, Americans got 16 of the 32 questions correct. Atheists and agnostics got an average of 20.9 correct answers. Jews (20.5) and Mormons (20.3). Protestants got 16 correct answers on average, while Catholics got 14.7 questions right.
How will you do on the quiz?
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0105/Are-you-smarter-than-an-atheist-A-religious-quiz/When-does-the-Jewish-Sabbath-begin
Got 24, I most closely identify with Judaism I guess. (No Jew)
knowledge does not equal intelligence. intelligence is potential. knowledge is finite. whether or not a person knows information about religion, or any other topic or field of science that exists is not a determining factor in their potential to possess knowledge. this potential for knowledge exists independently of knowledge itself.
-
Ha, Coach is so stupid.
"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)"
"The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously. (Albert Einstein, Letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946)"
Albert Einstein: arch rationalist or scientist with a spiritual core?
A letter being auctioned in London this week adds more fuel to the long-simmering debate about the Nobel Prize-winning (Einstein) physicist's religious views. In the note, written the year before his death, Einstein dismissed the idea of God as the product of human weakness and the Bible as "pretty childish."
I don't care who said it....its about its content. Please refute it dummy.
-
I don't care who said it....its about its content. Please refute it dummy.
haha backpeddling, you moron. You specifically pointed out that it was Einstein, in hopes that your argument would be strengthened because Einstein said it. Little did you know, Einstein thought your type of religion was childish :D :D
hahaha, you just OWNED yourself. Do research before you go pointing out something. :D :D
-
haha backpeddling, you moron. You specifically pointed out that it was Einstein, in hopes that your argument would be strengthened because Einstein said it. Little did you know, Einstein thought your type of religion was childish :D :D
hahaha, you just OWNED yourself. Do research before you go pointing out something. :D :D
Refute its content. I would have posted it no matter who it was. How many times have you pm'd me reguarding my faith? You're the typical athiest to the enth degree.
-
Refute its content. I would have posted it no matter who it was. How many times have you pm'd me reguarding my faith? You're the typical athiest to the enth degree.
I will read the content in its entirety and will respond.
Well, I am just trying to understand your love for JC and/or God, yet youre hypocritical attitude on here. I know a few deeply religious people who act nothing like you and stick strongly to their faith. That means they follow the teachings of JC and the bible pretty closely. Whereas, you degrade people on here because of their race. Oh yeah, youre such a religious and pious person. You should practice what you preach on a daily basis.
-
I will read the content in its entirety and will respond.
Well, I am just trying to understand your love for JC and/or God, yet youre hypocritical attitude on here. I know a few deeply religious people who act nothing like you and stick strongly to their faith. That means they follow the teachings of JC and the bible pretty closely. Whereas, you degrade people on here because of their race. Oh yeah, youre such a religious and pious person. You should practice what you preach on a daily basis.
I am sorry but what you believe in and your behaviour are two completely different things, you don't have to be a saint because you believe there is a God, now if you are trying to preach to people about God's news, now you a have point, you better be Mother Theresa, but simply believing in a divine power doesn't mean you have to walk on egg shells. JMO
-
I am sorry but what you believe in and your behaviour are two completely different things, you don't have to be a saint because you believe there is a God, now if you are trying to preach to people about God's news, now you a have point, you better be Mother Theresa, but simply believing in a divine power doesn't mean you have to walk on egg shells. JMO
Believing loosely in God is one thing, but Coach appears to be a DEVOUT believer. So yes, if youre a devout believer you should make your behaviors in accordance with your beliefs. Your beliefs and your behavior, I would think in Gods eyes, are not separate.
-
Believing loosely in God is one thing, but Coach appears to be a DEVOUT believer. So yes, if youre a devout believer you should make your behaviors in accordance with your beliefs. Your beliefs and your behavior, I would think in Gods eyes, are not separate.
If you are a devout believer, then yes you're right, your goals should be in accordance
-
31/32
Mormonism tripped me up. Rest is simple.
Mormonism is a sick cult rooted in recent history. The Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 was nothing more than Mormons (including Brigham Young) dressed up as Native Americans who planned to rob and kill men, women and children in emigrant wagon trains coming west which they did in this particular incident to the tune of 120 people.
Joseph Smith, the founder is even more nutty and a professional Mountebank. Its amazing that there is a potential Presidential candidate that chooses to be associated with such nonsense. His death is quite fascinating though as was his life of trickery, scams and Charlatanism.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/G._W._Fasel_-_Charles_G._Crehen_-_Nagel_%26_Weingaertner_-_Martyrdom_of_Joseph_and_Hiram_Smith_in_Carthage_jail%2C_June_27th%2C_1844.jpg/738px-G._W._Fasel_-_Charles_G._Crehen_-_Nagel_%26_Weingaertner_-_Martyrdom_of_Joseph_and_Hiram_Smith_in_Carthage_jail%2C_June_27th%2C_1844.jpg)
-
Is that ALL that you have to say about what I wrote? How about some answers and opinions to what I said about science being critical and full of testing and religion is just about following words to the t and NEVER question or test them.
Well I am always up for debate, but just not in the mood right now, but I am sure we will have our time if you can keep things civilized, I will say this though, you certainly have some valid points.
Now at the end you suggested our way of thinking wasn't logical, which I feel could be a fair assessment, however there is absolutely nothing logical about the origins of any alternative scenario no matter how you slice it. See whatever you believe in, regardless of what it is, cannot explain where matter came from, cannot explain how time started or what was before time,.the origins of space, nothing rational about any explanation on these matters, the best scientist have been baffled for centuries on the concept of having a single moment as the beginning cause it is simply illogical to assume that everything spontaneously sprung into existence, now that is hocus pocus, Now tell me this, if the universe is expanding and contains within space, time and matter, what is the universe expanding into, to may avenews that can't be explained using rational thinking, there has to be an illogical answere to these concepts.
So I clearly understand how you guys can perceive how our faith in God can be weird but the limits of a human brain is not capable of knowing certain things, I doubt we will ever know from a scientific perspective the answere to the weirdest riddles in life. Until then I will have my faith and respect other people's beliefs. :)
-
I don't care who said it....its about its content. Please refute it dummy.
Just a quick note...
Brains have been seen. In every normal human who has ever been autopsied they have found a human brain. There are human brains in jars. There is no dispute human brains exist because there is empirical evidence it does
This is mainly where the student jumps the track. A logical person can safely conclude the professor has a brain without having seen, touched etc the brain because of the overwhelming empirical evidence that it exists. And it is not asking you to take a leap of faith into the supernatural to do so.
Not so with a god
-
Mormonism is a sick cult rooted in recent history. The Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 was nothing more than Mormons (including Brigham Young) dressed up as Native Americans who planned to rob and kill men, women and children in emigrant wagon trains coming west which they did in this particular incident to the tune of 120 people.
Joseph Smith, the founder is even more nutty and a professional Mountebank. Its amazing that there is a potential Presidential candidate that chooses to be associated with such nonsense. His death is quite fascinating though as was his life of trickery, scams and Charlatanism.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/G._W._Fasel_-_Charles_G._Crehen_-_Nagel_%26_Weingaertner_-_Martyrdom_of_Joseph_and_Hiram_Smith_in_Carthage_jail%2C_June_27th%2C_1844.jpg/738px-G._W._Fasel_-_Charles_G._Crehen_-_Nagel_%26_Weingaertner_-_Martyrdom_of_Joseph_and_Hiram_Smith_in_Carthage_jail%2C_June_27th%2C_1844.jpg)
All religions would appear as equally as ridiculous were they not shrouded in the mystery of time.
Of course, that's assuming that they are viewed with a practical mind, of which they are not.
-
All religions would appear as equally as ridiculous were they not shrouded in the mystery of time.
Of course, that's assuming that they are viewed with a practical mind, of which they are not.
I know you're a teacher, is this what you "teach" your students? or do you teach both sides? if you do, I'm sure you're emphasizing the non-belief side of YOU like most liberal teachings in this country. And then you wonder why kids are so fucked up ::)
"progressive movement" haha!
-
I know you're a teacher, is this what you "teach" your students? or do you teach both sides? if you do, I'm sure you're emphasizing the non-belief side of YOU like most liberal teachings in this country. And then you wonder why kids are so fucked up ::)
"progressive movement" haha!
I teach English to Chinese people in China.
They are almost all atheists.
Religion rarely comes up, but when it does, I tell them of the anti-intellectual bent of so many people like you.
We all have a good belly laugh.
-
I teach English to Chinese people in China.
They are almost all atheists.
Religion rarely comes up, but when it does, I tell them of the anti-intellectual bent of so many people like you.
We all have a good belly laugh.
haha, good one
-
The founding fathers were progressives.
HTH.
-
What sides? There is only 1 side, the proven sides such as exact sciences. There is no other side. SHould be teach kids about Spiderman. He must be real, I saw it in a book and more importantly 'How do we know Spiderman IS NOT real'. Prove to me Spiderman IS NOT real and I will suspend my belief. Until then he is real and better then any God!
Kids being fucked up? Whats the connection with this and not teaching religion? With religion kids would be allright? How so?
And how has science proven there is no God, could you elaborate please?
-
I got a 30/32... The only ones I missed were the start of the Jewish Sabbath and who led the so-called "First Great Awakening." I'm also an atheist. 8)
-
With us speaking of Einstein and saying Coach owned himself, well, let us use Einstein's formula to prove there is a God, shall we? E=MC^2 , this formula was proven with the detonation of the atomic bomb, where my boy Einstein said matter is nothing more than energy bound together by more energy and one can mathematically prove the amount of energy in a given amount of mass. With that is proven that matter or atoms can be destroyed BUT can NOT be created, hhmmm? Therefore, Einstein himself has no answer other than a higher power creating matter?
However, a common man wrote a scripture that may encompass this matter building object?
Heb 11:3 NIV says, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.”
-
Someone slow this thread down...the intellects within it are absolutely dizzying.
-
Refute its content. I would have posted it no matter who it was. How many times have you pm'd me reguarding my faith? You're the typical athiest to the enth degree.
Good grief, not this bullshit again... I've already refuted this in another thread on here - a thread that I am pretty sure you posted in before. Others have thoroughly refuted it as well. Why do you an your ilk insist on reusing the same refuted arguments - if the piece of drivel you posted can even be called an argument.
Not that you care to actually entertain such things, of course. You believe what you believe - blindly and without thinking - and no amount of logic will persuade you.
If you want to become a critical thinker and learn why the "argument" you posted isn't an argument. - and I grant that it's a big if because, as I said above, I don't think you care to learn or understand - then I would suggest thay you: (a) take a course in elementary logic (typically offered by the philosophy department in most Colleges and Universities) to find out about things like logical fallacies and things like logical consistency and (b) pick up the book "Atheism: The Case Againsy God" by George H. Smith.
-
And no wonder why people think Christians are stupid ;D
lol Einstein proved God was real for you LMFAO epic backfire there coach
-
With us speaking of Einstein and saying Coach owned himself, well, let us use Einstein's formula to prove there is a God, shall we? E=MC^2 , this formula was proven with the detonation of the atomic bomb, where my boy Einstein said matter is nothing more than energy bound together by more energy and one can mathematically prove the amount of energy in a given amount of mass. With that is proven that matter or atoms can be destroyed BUT can NOT be created, hhmmm? Therefore, Einstein himself has no answer other than a higher power creating matter?
However, a common man wrote a scripture that may encompass this matter building object?
Heb 11:3 NIV says, “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.”
You get an F in Physics. Matter cannot be created or destroyed.
-
You get an F in Physics. Matter cannot be created or destroyed.
Holy Shit, next, somone that actually isn't ignorant! And he claimed to get a 30/32 Bahahahahaha
-
With that is proven that matter or atoms can be destroyed BUT can NOT be created, hhmmm?
Bullshit... New particles are created all the time in particle accelerators. That is one of things they are designed to do: convert energy into subatomic particles by colliding electrons and positrons at relativistic velocities and converting some of that kinetic energy into new particles.
I'm sick and tired of people with no scientific background and only the most rudimentary understanding of simple physics talking about things like they are world-renowned experts and presenting their half-assed opinions and poor understanding as indisputable scientific facts.
You get an F in Physics. Matter cannot be created or destroyed.
Not true: see above. Matter can be created and it can be destroyed. It's just that when matter is created[/b] a certain, quantifiable amount of energy is actually converted into matter. Similarly, when matter is destroyed, it is actually converted into a certain, quantifiable amount of energy.
-
Bullshit... New particles are created all the time in particle accelerators. That is one of things they are designed to do: convert energy into subatomic particles by colliding electrons and positrons at relativistic velocities and converting some of that kinetic energy into new particles.
I'm sick and tired of people with no scientific background and only the most rudimentary understanding of simple physics talking about things like they are world-renowned experts and presenting their half-assed opinions and poor understanding as indisputable scientific facts.
Bullshit....first off, new particles are not being created, they are being discovered! Secondly, if you want to dribble on like you know something, then spew some facts and refute Einstein's theory brain child! Never has energy been coverted to matter, never....please indicate in which physics book you found matter being produced from energy? Not your "theory" books either!
-
Bullshit....first off, new particles are not being created, they are being discovered!
For a complete idiot, you actually managed to produce a brilliant statement: it manages to show of your idiocy in a very elegant and compact way. Congratulations.
Secondly, if you want to dribble on like you know something, then spew some facts and refute Einstein's theory brain child! Never has energy been coverted to matter, never....please indicate in which physics book you found matter being produced from energy? Not your "theory" books either!
The whole point of Einstein's theory is that matter and energy are interchangeable! Energy being converted into matter isn't against Einstein's theory. If you think it is, feel free to point out exactly where either General or Special Relativity state such a thing.
-
For a complete idiot, you actually managed to produce a brilliant statement: it manages to show of your idiocy in a very elegant and compact way. Congratulations.
The whole point of Einstein's theory is that matter and energy are interchangeable! Energy being converted into matter isn't against Einstein's theory. If you think it is, feel free to point out exactly where either General or Special Relativity state such a thing.
Matter and energy may be interchangeable with effect, however, one can not be substituted by the other. If an electron hits an electron, then a electron will be ejected from that shell, at that point photon energy is created and next electron falls into place. Not substituted with energy.
The new particle that was found today, also refutes the "interchangeable" stance, when opposite particles collide that obliterate themselves.
Therefore in these two interactions, matter and energy never substitute just cause an effect. Matter is never formed by energy, just more energy.
-
Matter and energy may be interchangeable with effect, however, one can not be substituted by the other. If an electron hits and electron, and electron ejected from shell, then photon energy is created and next electron falls into place. Not substituted with energy.
The new particle that was found today, also refutes the "interchangeable" stance, when opposite particles collide that obliterate themselves.
Correct
-
Matter and energy may be interchangeable with effect, however, one can not be substituted by the other. If an electron hits and electron, and electron ejected from shell, then photon energy is created and next electron falls into place. Not substituted with energy.
Depends what you mean by "substituted." I never said that energy was a substitute for matter or vice versa. But matter can be converted into energy - see nuclear fission, for example, where a large amount of energy is released in the form of gamma rays - and energy can be converted into matter. See, for example http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/e144/nytimes.html (http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/e144/nytimes.html).
The new particle that was found today, also refutes the "interchangeable" stance, when opposite particles collide that obliterate themselves.
How does the discovery of any particle refute the interchangeable state? I'll agree that energy and matter aren't interchangeable in the sense that "here's 3.14159 GeV of energy and *tada* suddenly! Behold foofoo particle!" but matter can be created out of energy. But see here: http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/particle_creation.html
Therefore in these to interactions, matter and energy never substitute just cause an effect. Matter is never formed by energy, just more energy.
I don't quite follow what you mean by "Matter is never formed by energy, just more energy." unless it's an obtuse reference to threshold energy. But even if that's the case, that doesn't help your point. Indeed, it only strengthens mine, that bosonic particle interactions can give rise to fermionic particles.
-
30 of 32 and I hate pretty much everyone.
-
1 of 32
-
Depends what you mean by "substituted." I never said that energy was a substitute for matter or vice versa. But matter can be converted into energy - see nuclear fission, for example, where a large amount of energy is released in the form of gamma rays - and energy can be converted into matter. See, for example http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/e144/nytimes.html (http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/e144/nytimes.html).
I will combat this argument with this simple article, are we going to talk subatomic structures or matter? http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970724a.html
What I meant without copy and pasting someone elses ideas or thoughts, this is just mine entirely, is like in that case where they used accelerators and high laser beams, it took accelerated electrons blasted across a tube and to collide (with probably a tungtsten material) to dispell millions of electrons thus producing a vast amount of photons (energy)...This was my point, it takes so much more energy to even make one subparticle and this is no where near living matter.
I need to be more pointed in my argument, we have not seen any indication that energy can be converted to any "living" matter in which this whole argument started about is a higher power creating "living" matter from energy.
I must admit, for someone I thought rolled around naked with pictures of himself, you have proved that your not just another schmoe. Hats off sir!
-
30 of 32. Missed the Maimides and First Great Awakening ones.
If you have a half-way decent education and read the news occassionally, you should do pretty well on this quiz.
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
-
30 or 32. Missed the Maimides and First Great Awakening ones.
If you have a half-way decent education and read the news occassionally, you should do pretty well on this quiz.
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
Heracles
-
Professor : You are a Christian, aren't you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?
Student : Yes.
Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn't. How is this GOD good then? HM?
(Student was silent.)
Professor: You can't answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Is satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor: Where does satan come from ?
Student : From … GOD …
Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn't it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student : Yes.
Professor: So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer.)
Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, who created them ?
(Student had no answer.)
Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?
Student : No, sir.
Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?
Student : No , sir.
Professor: Have you ever felt your GOD, tasted your GOD, smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?
Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.
Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Professor: Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
Professor: Yes.
Student : No, sir. There isn't.
(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)
Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?
Student : You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?
Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?
Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.
Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)
Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an ongoing endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class was in uproar.)
Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?
(The class broke out into laughter. )
Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Professor: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.
Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.
P.S.
I believe you have enjoyed the conversation. And if so, you'll probably want your friends / colleagues to enjoy the same, won't you?
Forward this to increase their knowledge … or FAITH.
By the way, that student was EINSTEIN.
The God Botherers (Student) whole argument is hinging on the fact that because we cant see the professors brain it doesn't exist and we have to just use faith - what a joke, unlike GOD, we can kill the professor, crack open his cranium and confirm our suspicions, the professor does indeed have a brain. No Faith Required - Dumb Argument!
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again: to assume religious folk are universally stupid, ignorant or whatever else is illogical. Anyone who's studied the most rudimentary fallacies of relevance would understand that. It's little different than me saying people who believe in extraterrestrial life are morons, idiots and so on.
Generally speaking, people who think knowledge begins and ends with religion ARE simple fucks. But there remains a whole rainbow of intellectual grades which embrace/reject religion for reasons no one's mentioned here. Take my friend Curtis (I will not give you his full name, but intrepid Google-Fu fighters might discover he authored some books for perhaps the most popular franchise in the world). He is a doctor of astrophysics. Literally, a fucking *rocket scientist.* Only the most obstinate, delusional troll here might claim to rival his I.Q. ::)
While he says his initial leaning is toward "weak agnostic," he chooses to believe in an afterlife to which his consciousness will transcend because that belief serves him. That is, he is unsettled by the concept of ceasing to exist altogether when he dies; therefore, belief in an afterlife helps keep him going, helps keep him from obsessing over the hereto unrealistic probability of retaining his mind into some computer (which he has certainly considered) or other means.
Religion is more than believing some tall tale about Moses parting the sea, a burning bush, Noah's Arc, Mohammed having his heart pulled out, "purified" and then put back in his chest, etc. A lot of it is bullshit, but more often than not, the people who stand by, point, laugh and talk about how the sheep believe in the "invisible man in the sky" seem to conveniently overlook the millions of intelligent people who choose to believe in a higher power, afterlife or whatever for reasons other than simple childhood brainwashing indoctrination.
-
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
Hercules ;D Heracles, son of Zeus
-
Any pussy pics in this thread?
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again: to assume religious folk are universally stupid, ignorant or whatever else is illogical. Anyone who's studied the most rudimentary fallacies of relevance would understand that. It's little different than me saying people who believe in extraterrestrial life are morons, idiots and so on.
Generally speaking, people who think knowledge begins and ends with religion ARE simple fucks. But there remains a whole rainbow of intellectual grades which embrace/reject religion for reasons no one's mentioned here. Take my friend Curtis (I will not give you his full name, but intrepid Google-Fu fighters might discover he authored some books for perhaps the most popular franchise in the world). He is a doctor of astrophysics. Literally, a fucking *rocket scientist.* Only the most obstinate, delusional troll here might claim to rival his I.Q. ::)
While he says his initial leaning is toward "weak agnostic," he chooses to believe in an afterlife to which his consciousness will transcend because that belief serves him. That is, he is unsettled by the concept of ceasing to exist altogether when he dies; therefore, belief in an afterlife helps keep him going, helps keep him from obsessing over the hereto unrealistic probability of retaining his mind into some computer (which he has certainly considered) or other means.
Religion is more than believing some tall tale about Moses parting the sea, a burning bush, Noah's Arc, Mohammed having his heart pulled out, "purified" and then put back in his chest, etc. A lot of it is bullshit, but more often than not, the people who stand by, point, laugh and talk about how the sheep believe in the "invisible man in the sky" seem to conveniently overlook the millions of intelligent people who choose to believe in a higher power, afterlife or whatever for reasons other than simple childhood brainwashing indoctrination.
Define Intelligence, just because someone holds a degree or high status position doesn't make them intelligent, they are just successful repeaters and were able to memorise facts and remember them when tested. The more you fit well in to society and raise up it's heights, the more I would argue that you have been successfully indoctrinated and have enough brain capacity to read and write and memorise facts, that's about it, most of the professionals I meet are fucking idiots - I am shocked the people society allows to call Professional - the Title Professional should be something that is earned from your peers, not given to you from a school that is praising you for following there set curriculum and successfully memorising it. To be Intelligent, you need to be able to follow your own line of inquiry to a satisfying conclusion, and most professionals I have met are unable to do this, they just repeat what they have been told like parrots. The World really needs radicals like Noam Chomsky giving orders, but that will never happen with the Bullies running the schoolyard.
-
Any pussy pics in this thread?
;D
-
30 or 32. Missed the Maimides and First Great Awakening ones.
If you have a half-way decent education and read the news occassionally, you should do pretty well on this quiz.
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
Ha, I love this stuff but C'mon that's an easy one,
-
I will combat this argument with this simple article, are we going to talk subatomic structures or matter? http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970724a.html
Actually we are talking about bosonic particles, which do not have mass, vs. fermionic particles, which do have mass. It's been proven theoretically and verified by observation that the interaction of bosonic particles can create fermionic particles.
What I meant without copy and pasting someone elses ideas or thoughts, this is just mine entirely, is like in that case where they used accelerators and high laser beams, it took accelerated electrons blasted across a tube and to collide (with probably a tungtsten material) to dispell millions of electrons thus producing a vast amount of photons (energy)...This was my point, it takes so much more energy to even make one subparticle and this is no where near living matter.
Right, traditional particle accelerators accelerate electrons (or positrons) at relativistic velocities and slam them into a target (the specific nature of the target is irrelevant, except that it's made of fermions - i.e. it has mass). They do not do this to generate photons, although photons are certainly generated. They do this because at the extremely high energies produced by such collisions, energy itself can be converted into exotic forms of matter, which could have existed for very brief amounts of time immediately after the Big Bang.
As to your point that it takes a lot of energy to convert matter into energy, that is right. The energy levels necessary for the creation of a single particle/anti-particle pair is significantly higher than the energy the pair would have at a resting state.
You may want to read up on a branch of experimental/applied physics called "Two Photon Physics" which looks at what happens when photons collide. It's really quite fascinating.
I need to be more pointed in my argument, we have not seen any indication that energy can be converted to any "living" matter in which this whole argument started about is a higher power creating "living" matter from energy.
Terminology does matter, especially in discussions such as this, because without accurate and consistent terms, it's both impossible to get anywhere and possible to get anywhere. For example, there's no such thing as living matter. Matter is matter. Life is an emergent property of particular arrangements of matter. But the way you phrased the above statement suggests some mystical distinction between, say the matter that's in a rock and the matter that is you. Fundamentally, both are quite similar.
I must admit, for someone I thought rolled around naked with pictures of himself, you have proved that your not just another schmoe. Hats off sir!
Well thanks. To be fair, I would never roll around naked with pictures of myself - I'm neither ripped nor muscular enough to entertain such notions. But hey, one can dream... one can dream!
-
they could of made all questions on one page, but they force you to load new pages for each as well as a page inbetween in order to display more ads lol
smart
-
Define Intelligence, just because someone holds a degree or high status position doesn't make them intelligent, they are just successful repeaters and were able to memorise facts and remember them when tested.
A doctor of astrophysics doesn't get by on rote memorization, for God's sake (pun intended). Are you familiar with the term "cognitive complexity"?
the Title Professional should be something that is earned from your peers, not given to you from a school that is praising you for following there set curriculum and successfully memorising it. To be Intelligent, you need to be able to follow your own line of inquiry to a satisfying conclusion, and most professionals I have met are unable to do this, they just repeat what they have been told like parrots.
Somehow the subject of my post was changed from an astrophysicist of my acquaintance into "most professionals" you know. How did that happen? And why do you assume Curtis is a mere parrot, or that he's the only truly smart person who eschews atheism? Talk about a bold statement!
The irony is, a person of even fairly modest intelligence could've figured out who I was talking about by now ...
-
And how has science proven there is no God, could you elaborate please?
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
-
What sides? There is only 1 side, the proven sides such as exact sciences. There is no other side. SHould be teach kids about Spiderman. He must be real, I saw it in a book and more importantly 'How do we know Spiderman IS NOT real'. Prove to me Spiderman IS NOT real and I will suspend my belief. Until then he is real and better then any God!
Kids being fucked up? Whats the connection with this and not teaching religion? With religion kids would be allright? How so?
I ask him what science proves there is no God with this statement.
That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence
With that, I am asking for his evidence.
-
1 of 32
;D
-
I ask him what science proves there is no God with this statement.
Before you ask anything about "God" you must provide a definition of the term. What does the term mean? What attributes does "God" possess?
-
Before you ask anything about "God" you must provide a definition of the term. What does the term mean? What attributes does "God" possess?
Whatever God he is dispelling, by saying "science" proved otherwise, just curious what "God" he is referring?
With that, are you agnostic, atheist, what position to you hold?
-
Whatever God he is dispelling, by saying "science" proved otherwise, just curious what "God" he is referring?
With that, are you agnostic, atheist, what position to you hold?
Me personally? I'm an atheist.
-
Me personally? I'm an atheist.
I am surprised to see that? I figured you to be agnostic.
With your willingness to educate yourself and always find the why and hows to your questions, I would suspect you to be that way with the beginning?
-
I am surprised to see that? I figured you to be agnostic.
With your willingness to educate yourself and always find the why and hows to your questions, I would suspect you to be that way with the beginning?
I'd be receptive to an argument that agnosticism is a more rational position, but so far I haven't heard anything compelling.
-
atheist replies a connection with religion, albeit a negative one. It puts believing in god as norm and therefore all others are non-believers.
Atheist implies someone doesn't believe that deities exists or that belief in deities is rational. Nothing more nothing less.
This also implies and in a way validates believing by putting it first and thus legitimising it further.
I don't follow? Saying that the concept of a deity is illogical and belief in a deity is irrational validates and legitimizes deities and beliefs in them? Really??
Agnostic is a pure standpoint of not being attached to any ruling view of God or supernatural. It does not even recognize it. There could be a god, there could be not. Until so far there is zero evidence so I am not swaying one way or the other-->agnostic
If it's true that there is zero evidence, it would only be because there are no consequences at all to the existence of this deity. Claiming that there is something thing that is neither provable nor disprovable implies that neither the claim nor the claims' negation has any detectable consequences. Or to put it simply the "claim" doesn't actually claim anything.
-
Atheist - originating from the Greek word Atheos , " A " meaning without and " theos " meaning theology or the study of God , Atheos = without God
Anything beyond that isn't really atheism , more like Christopher Hitchens said " anti-theism "
-
You guys had me at Bosonic Particles :-*
-
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
Heracles
Give that man (and e-Kul) a gold star! Though this should have been the picture posted:
(http://www.briansdriveintheater.com/hercules/arnold/arnold41.jpg)
Or maybe this one, if you have $20:
(http://media.screened.com/uploads/1/11343/536691-hercules___lou_ferrigno_as_hercules_movie_live_model_01.jpg)
-
For Getbiggers, here is questions 33: Name the Greek/Roman demi-god who was the strongest of the ancient mythological heros? Bonus points if you can come up with the Greek spelling of his name.
Give that man (and e-Kul) a gold star! Though this should have been the picture posted:
(http://www.briansdriveintheater.com/hercules/arnold/arnold41.jpg)
Or maybe this one, if you have $20:
(http://media.screened.com/uploads/1/11343/536691-hercules___lou_ferrigno_as_hercules_movie_live_model_01.jpg)
Now 34; Who was the Sumerian hero that slayed humbaba in the ceder forest, reigned out of walled Uruk, Not Greek but Akkadian mythology
-
Now 34; Who was the Sumerian hero that slayed humbaba in the ceder forest, reigned out of walled Uruk, Not Greek but Akkadian mythology
Gilgamesh
-
Gilgamesh
Technically, yes. But he only killed Humbabaafter Enkidu urged him to show no mercy.
-
Gilgamesh
Technically, yes. But he only killed Humbabaafter Enkidu urged him to show no mercy.
ha, yes, amazing story though
-
Religions ::) Give 10% each week for a big ass church wtf? Then they teach non-materialism.