Topical Discussion - Please try to get overly angry/upset

[OohhoO]

Deleted example as it contained sad stuff.

May your capitalism always treat you kindly!

[Xest]

On the contrary. I suggest that you are determining what those facts are from your understanding of the laws of Physics as you currently know them. You are ignoring the fact that those laws are incomplete.

You're totally ignoring what I've said, I can prove various laws of physics as fact and you're ignoring the fact that not all laws of physics are incomplete, that enough are complete to prove many bible miracles as complete impossibilities. Again you're only adding more evidence to backup my comment that those who defend god do so only with ignorance of the facts, choosing to ignore hard evidence when presented to them.

Those dimensions that we don't yet know of or understand, could well be (and most likely are) the mechanism behind why miracles have occured/do occur/will continue to occur.

Again you're proving my point, you're proving that your lack of understanding of physics shows you're incapable of making a reasoned argument on the subject. You see a dimension in the sci-fi sense, as an alternate reality however that is merely the sci-fi description of it. The reality is that dimensions are much more boring I'm afraid, space (x,y,z) makes up 3 dimensions, time makes up the 4th. There's discussion that gravity is possibly also a dimension, however there's absolutely no room in the idea of dimensions for the explanation of a diety, the converting of a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish into 5,000, the ability to survive being eaten by a whale or the ability to part the sea at will.

Certainly things such as quantum theory are fascinating and can produces some pretty unbeleivable results, for example two particles can be linked without ever physically touching and you can alter the state of one which will result in the others state changing identically whether the particles are 1cm apart or 200 million miles apart. To people who don't understand the science behind it this would certainly seem miraculous but in fact it's really not so incredible.

With all due respect, you are looking at things from the "playpen" of the security that your understanding of the physical realm provides. I don't mean that as insult.

This is quite an ironic statement when you look at the situation you're in as a beleiver in god. It's those who use god as a catch-all to explain things they don't understand rather than those who dare to challenge our understanding of the world and push forward research that are safe in their secure little "Well it's obviously gods doing" playpen.

I am willing to accept that what I believe may be wrong. Are you so sure in yourself that what you say is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Are you able to accept that you could be wrong? Even just for one brief moment?

Of course I could be wrong, but I'm not much of a gambling person, I'd rather base my beleifs and understanding on things that can be proven time and time again than on the stories of a book from many thousands of years ago that has absolutely no factual evidence backing the more miraculous events in it, despite being in existence for such lengths of time.

Despite me not being much of a gambling person, I'd certainly be willing to bet my life that if religion wasn't force fed to kids from a very young age and hence leading to religion being something forgotten about and lost in time that there'd be absolutely no adverse effects on the world, there'd be no mass plague, no smiting down, no riders of the apocalypse invading the earth.

The fact is the indoctrination of children at a young age, before they can think for themselves is the only thing keeping religion alive at least in the developed world. Todays education system allows for kids to think for themselves and apply basic reasoning such that something with a lot of factual evidence holds more weight than something without. I certainly think religion is a pretty cool thing, some of the stories are absolutely brilliant but they should be taught as just that - stories then let the kids decide if they beleive it's true or not. It's really interesting reading about various beleifs hence why things like religious education classes are pretty good, however whilst it's good to teach about the ideas of various religions it's wrong to teach the ideas as fact. Sadly, even todays supposed western world of free speech denies kids the choice to make up their own mind on religions issues in a lot of schools. It's even more damaging in the middle east where indoctrination of a specific type of islam is used to preach hatred for the west driving people to beleive it deep enough that they'll blow themselves up for the ideas of it.

[Satyn]

Despite me not being much of a gambling person, I'd certainly be willing to bet my life that if religion wasn't force fed to kids from a very young age and hence leading to religion being something forgotten about and lost in time that there'd be absolutely no adverse effects on the world, there'd be no mass plague, no smiting down, no riders of the apocalypse invading the earth.

The fact is the indoctrination of children at a young age, before they can think for themselves is the only thing keeping religion alive at least in the developed world. Todays education system allows for kids to think for themselves and apply basic reasoning such that something with a lot of factual evidence holds more weight than something without. I certainly think religion is a pretty cool thing, some of the stories are absolutely brilliant but they should be taught as just that - stories then let the kids decide if they beleive it's true or not. It's really interesting reading about various beleifs hence why things like religious education classes are pretty good, however whilst it's good to teach about the ideas of various religions it's wrong to teach the ideas as fact. Sadly, even todays supposed western world of free speech denies kids the choice to make up their own mind on religions issues in a lot of schools. It's even more damaging in the middle east where indoctrination of a specific type of islam is used to preach hatred for the west driving people to beleive it deep enough that they'll blow themselves up for the ideas of it.

I agree 100% on this. I was raised as a christian. I had very religious grandparents and my father is a believer aswell (not like gandy but he believes there is 'something') I didnt get the choice if i wanted to be a christian or not. I was baptised, went to christian schools, learned about the bible, did my first and second communion, was forced to go to church ...
I will not do that to my son. He's 13months now, he's not baptised. For a lot of ppl in my family i'm letting my son grow up in sin cos he's not baptised yet. I dont care. I'm giving my son the choice. If he turns 15 and comes to me and tells me he wants to be a christian .. so be it, he needs to do what makes him happy not what other ppl force upon him.
Things have changed a lot over here in the last 20 years. We used to have very good schools (the christian schools) and then the schools where the outlaws went to. Ppl were forced in a way to become a christian so they would get a proper education. If you werent a christian you werent allowed to enter that school.
Now luckely that is slowly changing.

Gods, religions ... all one big shite to me. And dont even get me started about churches. They fuck with ppl's minds.

The stories in the bible are amazing, but thats what they are ... stories.

[Gandelf]

And dont even get me started about churches. They **** with ppl's minds.

What do you mean by "churches"? Do you just mean Christian churches? Are there any other religious buildings you are thinking of?

[Gandelf]

Stuff...

The attached picture is the ultimate proof of the existence of God and no, I'm not making fun of Xest's genitals (not intentionally anyway).

[Genedril]

Intelligent debate??? Lack of mud flinging???? I'm almost in shock.

For the record, proper socialism has never been attempted. It's always been driven by the middle classes trying to attain power over those with power (in the cases of Communisim as people generally understand it). Marx said this would never work & the workers had to understand & appreciate their situation in order to force social change to move away from capitalism (which he viewed as slavery - business owners 'owning' the workers).

If you want a smile then some people think the US has exported more socialism than any 'communist' country - in the form of Star Trek (after the original series) ias it's effectively a socialist society where everyone performs to the best of their ability in a role that suits them without the need for cash. The capitalists are portrayed as being twisted money grabbers out for themselves.

Science will always change it's views on it's understanding of the world as it has a tendency to 'challenge' itself. As scientists learn more & gain a greater understanding of the world they do re-visit 'old' experiments & put the knowlesge they have gained to the 'accepted norm'. This means the things that science currently claim as 'fact' may be proved not to be so in the future. Does this make it a reason to not trust it? I'd say not, as anything that challenges itself in the pursuit of the 'truth' & does not just say 'well they said it is so, therefore it must be' is better for humanity than people saying 'this was written eons ago & translated from a dead language. We shall not challenge it for it is so'. This does not mean we should follow science blindly though. Fortunately many scienetists don't follow it blindly either, else they wouldn't challenge the accepted scientifc 'facts'.

As for animal testing - I'd say it's a neccesary evil for medical research (I have a hard time squaring it mentally for cosmetic research - however that's a judgement call). I'd far rather that some animals were sacrificed in order to cure humans than just to let the humans die. On the down side I think that the human race is over-populating the planet so I'm kind of stuck on the fence. The 'testing' should not be done on age related diseases in my eyes, prolonging life to the point where it starts to have (what I'd consider to be) little quality is a waste of resources (both in the scientific research & also in the additional resources required to deal with the older population). Hmm, sounds a bit Logan's Run-esque.

I wanted to say something about morality but I've harped on long enough. Are humans born with it? I'd think that society instills/dictates it's own morals on the young & these are what we grow up with & pass on. Morals have changed over the centuries & morals differ from culture to culture.

[Haarewin]

[quote="Gandelf"]The attached picture is the ultimate proof of the existence of God and no, I'm not making fun of Xest's genitals (not intentionally anyway). ]

i'm sure hes a grower not a show-er
i hate the evangelical christians. the pat robertson types.
other ones can get on with their life if they don't denounce my way of life.

[Kallima]

What I was taught at school was ethics not really religion.

What I was taught at home was to hate people who were in any way 'different'.

I trained as a scientist. Science is not infallible. Apart from mistakes in good faith, and contradictory theories, people have made up fake discoveries and covered up truths for personal glory or profit. I think it has more integrity than politics though.

What I believe is my own opinion based on my own personal experience. I can't argue with other people because a personal experience is entirely that--- personal. Why would I share it and why would they believe it? It might not match their experience, and they should base their views on their own experience not mine.

One question. Is it safe to assume that those believing in a personal deity believe in life after death? Do those who do not believe in a deity believe in life after death or that death is an absolute end?

[Ovi]

Animal testing for cosmetics is a hard one.

If we assume cosmetics are acceptable, then they also need to be safe. Just because they are applied externally does not mean that there is no risk of harm. Ask someone with a nut allergy about using coconut shampoo for example!

If you don't want cosmetics tested on animals I'll let you tell the females that they can't have any Lippy!

[Ovi]

As for animal testing - I'd say it's a neccesary evil for medical research (I have a hard time squaring it mentally for cosmetic research - however that's a judgement call). I'd far rather that some animals were sacrificed in order to cure humans than just to let the humans die. On the down side I think that the human race is over-populating the planet so I'm kind of stuck on the fence. The 'testing' should not be done on age related diseases in my eyes, prolonging life to the point where it starts to have (what I'd consider to be) little quality is a waste of resources (both in the scientific research & also in the additional resources required to deal with the older population). Hmm, sounds a bit Logan's Run-esque.

But the idea of slowing / stopping the aging process means that life will have quality. Until Mother Earth decides she has had enough.