Dear Atheist,

[r00t]

Dear Atheist,

Do you think its a coincidence that...
of billions of stars and planets in the many galaxies, only earth has life, and abundance of it?

the sun is 400 times the size of the earth's moon, 400 times further away from earth than the moon, yet they look both proportionally the same size in our sky?

the sun lights the days nicely, while the moon glimmers in the night sweetly and the clouds bring forth rain to water our crops, which bring forth food in your stomach?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
birds in the air whistle sweet songs and dogs show unconditional love?

your body heals naturally when you cut yourself, or you become sick and it goes away?

humans have intangible senses, called emotions where we feel love, hate, anger, sadness, happiness, shock, confused, hurt, healed, and so forth?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
you were born from a lady's womb and you will die a death, without choice of either?

the complexity of dna is so mind boggling, that scientists worldwide now have gone from 'no god' to claiming a "Divine Creator"?

your body's anatomy is complex, so fine and so articulate that you wonder how this "accident" came to be?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
there are endless variety of delicious fruits, vegetables, nuts, wheats to make infinite delicious recipes to satisfy our hunger?

there are thousands and thousands of exotic amazing land animals and thousands more amazing sea creatures?

you have eyes so you can see, ears so you can hear, heart so you can feel, mind so you can think?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
there are thousands of recovered artifacts proving the validity of Scripture, the Holy Bible itself?

those who have faith in Jesus Christ witness miracles, worldwide?

almost all Old Testament prophecies have been already fulfilled and more continue being fulfilled?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
a farmer plants the seeds, yet the farmer does not make the seed grow and the farmer never initially created the seed?

that fruits and vegetables have seeds so that they produce more fruits and vegetables?

your body needs vitamins and nutrients found in GOD's natural foods such as fruits, vegetables, fish, meat, wheat?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
"The atheist cannot find God for the same reasons a thief cannot find a police officer."

[r00t]

Atheism: The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense.

[runlvlzero]

r00t doubleposted and mad about something religious in a religious way...

[Lune]

This is like your equivalent of the HBB anti-military troll threads.

Is this going to be a thing now?

[Kagatob]

http://i.imgur.com/70f57al.jpg

[r00t]

false premise, earth only 6000 years old

[Kagatob]

Shut up owl fucker.

[Phsic33]

Religious arguments don't go anywhere, and you can't really brag about who's right, because you'll both be dead by then.
Lack of belief =/= believing in shit by the way, your post is stupid.

[Lune]

If evolution is real than how come their is monkeys?

darwininians 0
lord 1

[r00t]

by lacking belief in god, you make the arrogant conclusion there is no god

there is no such thing as negative atheism

[Reguiy]

So many fallacies in OP. I can't tell if you're troll or not. If you are serious I'd recommend faith instead of logic. It makes a lot more sense.

[Phsic33]

Which god?

[r00t]

the supernatural creator of evertyhing

[Lune]

the supernatural creator of evertyhing

Who created the creator?

[Barkingturtle]

I can't tell if you're troll or not.

Seek Jesus.

[Phsic33]

Too much time spent into troll post, r00t.

[Kagatob]

Notice how Tralnia or however is spelled, never posts in these stupid troll threads. She knows he's full of shit.

[r00t]

The creator created himself because he is supernatural.

What was there before the big bang? Science will never answer it.

[Daldolma]

Atheism: The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense.

itt atheists still smarting over this knockout

[Lune]

The creator created himself because he is supernatural.

If the creator can create himself, then why not skip a step and say the universe created itself?

Why does existence need a reason?

itt atheists still smarting over this knockout


http://i.imgur.com/i40HwRP.jpg

-

Anyway, enjoy your troll thread ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to go masturbate.

[Kagatob]

Atheism: The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense.

itt atheists still smarting over this knockout

Actually, atheists tend to simply ignore nonsensical drivel such as that.

[r00t]

pretty much 200% spot on

[stonez138]

Everything in your original post is garbage. It's not worth my time to go through and de-bunk every line of bullshit.

Do you think its a coincidence that...
of billions of stars and planets in the many galaxies, only earth has life, and abundance of it?

If you don't believe in life on other planets you're an idiot. I've got one word for you Nephelim.

the sun is 400 times the size of the earth's moon, 400 times further away from earth than the moon, yet they look both proportionally the same size in our sky?

They're not. The percieved size of both changes constantly.

the sun lights the days nicely, while the moon glimmers in the night sweetly and the clouds bring forth rain to water our crops, which bring forth food in your stomach?

You're not even trying with that one.

birds in the air whistle sweet songs and dogs show unconditional love?

They don't. Birds annoy me and what do you think would happen if you stopped feeding you're dog. I won't even mention how the E word has conditioned dogs to be pack animals...

Post is garbage. Ever point is bullshit.

[r00t]

http://www.hog-cheese.com/foh/jesusdino.jpg

[Shannacore]

Notice how Tralnia or however is spelled, never posts in these stupid troll threads. She knows he's full of shit.

Religion and politics are not a part of our pillow talk, true.

[Vermicelli]

What was there before the big bang? Science will never answer it.

The big invoice from Acme Co.

http://www.animationartgallery.com/images/CJL/CJLAR.jpg

[Reguiy]

Post is garbage. EverY point is bullshit.

Ya. It's called trolling. Welcome to RNF.

[Alarti0001]

Atheism: The belief

stopped there... then lold

[Daldolma]

alarti finally realizing hypocrisy of atheism

[hatelore]

Dear Atheist,

Do you think its a coincidence that...
of billions of stars and planets in the many galaxies, only earth has life, and abundance of it?

the sun is 400 times the size of the earth's moon, 400 times further away from earth than the moon, yet they look both proportionally the same size in our sky?

the sun lights the days nicely, while the moon glimmers in the night sweetly and the clouds bring forth rain to water our crops, which bring forth food in your stomach?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
birds in the air whistle sweet songs and dogs show unconditional love?

your body heals naturally when you cut yourself, or you become sick and it goes away?

humans have intangible senses, called emotions where we feel love, hate, anger, sadness, happiness, shock, confused, hurt, healed, and so forth?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
you were born from a lady's womb and you will die a death, without choice of either?

the complexity of dna is so mind boggling, that scientists worldwide now have gone from 'no god' to claiming a "Divine Creator"?

your body's anatomy is complex, so fine and so articulate that you wonder how this "accident" came to be?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
there are endless variety of delicious fruits, vegetables, nuts, wheats to make infinite delicious recipes to satisfy our hunger?

there are thousands and thousands of exotic amazing land animals and thousands more amazing sea creatures?

you have eyes so you can see, ears so you can hear, heart so you can feel, mind so you can think?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
there are thousands of recovered artifacts proving the validity of Scripture, the Holy Bible itself?

those who have faith in Jesus Christ witness miracles, worldwide?

almost all Old Testament prophecies have been already fulfilled and more continue being fulfilled?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
a farmer plants the seeds, yet the farmer does not make the seed grow and the farmer never initially created the seed?

that fruits and vegetables have seeds so that they produce more fruits and vegetables?

your body needs vitamins and nutrients found in GOD's natural foods such as fruits, vegetables, fish, meat, wheat?

Do you think its a coincidence that...
"The atheist cannot find God for the same reasons a thief cannot find a police officer."


Def all a coincidence.

[Alarti0001]

alarti finally realizing hypocrisy of atheism

LOL you are even more confused than I thought. I lol'd because op thinks Atheism is a belief system.

[Daldolma]

LOL you are even more confused than I thought. I lol'd because op thinks Atheism is a belief system.

it is.

[Langrisserx]

OR IS IT

[Alarti0001]

it is.

You might believe that... but you would be wrong. I'm detecting a trend with you.

[kylok]

decent troll - read all this bull shit even knowing what it was just for the off chance that OP was serious. 4/10.

[Daldolma]

You might believe that... but you would be wrong. I'm detecting a trend with you.

prove that atheism is not a belief

[kylok]

prove that atheism is not a belief

Google -> Define: Atheism -> disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Disbelief =/= belief by way of very basic logic.

[r00t]

yall be cryin for jesus on your death beds I can hear your screams now

[kylok]

Only people who are afraid to die cry for Jesus/Buddha/God etc. Next troll should be something more original though, this subject has been beat to death way too often.

[Daldolma]

Only people who are afraid to die cry for Jesus/Buddha/God etc. Next troll should be something more original though, this subject has been beat to death way too often.

*beaten

moran

[kylok]

Also, since I'm bored and know my Ochem mechanisms forwards and backwards... My Ochem teacher is researching Molecular Phylogenetics and wrote a computer program that accurate calculates the entropy of, and the formation of, DNA strands that make up bacteria - one step closer to explaining the how of life instead of "ermahgawd black box = evidence of God".

[kylok]

*beaten

moran

Thanks for that, my English skills are a little rusty since I've been focusing on science for so long =)

[Daldolma]

there is still time to avoid eternal damnation

[r00t]

even if you explained abiogenesis you dont explain genesis

[Kagatob]

abiogenesis

He loves this term so much, acts like it's even a factor.

[kylok]

abiogenesis - the supposed production of living organisms from nonliving matter, as inferred from the apparent appearance of life in some infusions

genesis - the origin or mode of formation of something

So you're arguing that just because we know how DNA is made it doesn't explain how the pieces of DNA are made. I'd call that a slippery slope logical fallacy in the way that you can continue that line of logic infinitely. Similar to finding a fundamental building block of the universe, if you split something in half you always end up with something smaller - or that's at least what the last 150 years of science suggest.

Religion is great for helping people with problems cope with life. But that shit needs to stay out of attempting to explain the how of the universe. Simply, religion is not supported by the scientific method if applied properly.

[kylok]

your pic didn't show rellapse

[Alarti0001]

alarti finally realizing hypocrisy of atheism

*beaten

moran

the*
moran


spelling/grammar nazi's!

[Daldolma]

Simply, religion is not supported by the scientific method if applied properly.

thus proving the failures of the scientific method

[Daldolma]

the*
moran


spelling/grammar nazi's!

*nazis

moran

[Skywarp]

Owl Raper must have watched Evan & Bruce Almighty and thought it was time to preach to the infidels. Trolling motor ACTIVATE.

[kylok]

thus proving the failures of the scientific method

Proving why sheep need shepherds. If people learned to think properly they wouldn't need to have the same old ass dogma beaten into them every week to remind them how to life their lives. In middle school (hopefully) you were taught something call the Pythagorean Theorem - tells you how to calculate the third side of a right triangle given you know the values of the other two. Once you understood this concept did you ever go back to it on a weekly basis seeking some sort of divination out of the truth? Nah, you just shelved it away to be pulled out as necessary in case you forgot. Religious types read the same shit, over and over, and expected something new/more out of it every time - sounds pretty definition of crazy to me.

[Alarti0001]

*nazis

moran

^proof god doesn't exist

[kylok]

^proof god doesn't exist

I second this.

[doeda]

Quran or gtfo, ya'll brainwashed hipster Protestant

[kylok]

Quran or gtfo, ya'll brainwashed hipster Protestant

Yeah, cause the most recent version of a few thousand year old, generally misunderstood (at least imo) story has to be true...

[Langrisserx]

watch root start to ask these questions irl and get an answer.. he comes from lower left (on your face)

http://theync.com/scan_me2/man-got-shot-in-the-guts-then-in-the-face-at-metro-train-point-blank-range.htm

lol what were those bb guns.

[doeda]

Yeah, cause the most recent version of a few thousand year old, generally misunderstood (at least imo) story has to be true...

but if people still listened to the Pope, we'd all be morans

[DrKvothe]

Also, since I'm bored and know my Ochem mechanisms forwards and backwards... My Ochem teacher is researching Molecular Phylogenetics and wrote a computer program that accurate calculates the entropy of, and the formation of, DNA strands that make up bacteria - one step closer to explaining the how of life instead of "ermahgawd black box = evidence of God".

I want to derail this thread in an edifying way.

Lets talk about the biggest molecular mystery: the origins of homochirality. Can scientists determine (experimentally) feasible natural phenomena that would lead to a solution of monomers from which a homochiral molecular self-Replicator could propagate?

Also, what sort of ligation chemistry could provide the necessary balance of stability and reactivity to achieve spontaneous assembly of the first self-replicating catalyst? Amides and esters are too inert, as are phosphodiesters. Thioesters and disulfides are reasonable... Maybe hemiacetals?

Its pretty widely accepted that DNA wouldn't provide a suitable self-replicator, because base pairing limits its range of conformers and ties up potential catalytic moieties. Rna is much better suited, and indeed a nearly self-replicating rna sequence has been engineered, but it still seems like an unlikely first selfreplicator because of the monomer complexity and high energy of the phosphodiester bonds. We'll likely never know for sure what the original molecule was, but exploring possible scenarios is an extremely interesting area of study.

[kylok]

but if people still listened to the Pope, we'd all be morans

If you blindly listen to/take orders from a human being, especially one that you deify... you are a moronic sheep.

[kylok]

I want to derail this thread in an edifying way.

Lets talk about the biggest molecular mystery: the origins of homochirality. Can scientists determine (experimentally) feasible natural phenomena that would lead to a solution of monomers from which a homochiral molecular self-Replicator could propagate?

Also, what sort of ligation chemistry could provide the necessary balance of stability and reactivity to achieve spontaneous assembly of the first self-replicating catalyst? Amides and esters are too inert, as are phosphodiesters. Thioesters and disulfides are reasonable... Maybe hemiacetals?

Its pretty widely accepted that DNA wouldn't provide a suitable self-replicator, because base pairing limits its range of conformers and ties up potential catalytic moieties. Rna is much better suited, and indeed a nearly self-replicating rna sequence has been engineered, but it still seems like an unlikely first selfreplicator because of the monomer complexity and high energy of the phosphodiester bonds. We'll likely never know for sure what the original molecule was, but exploring possible scenarios is an extremely interesting area of study.
+10 very good. Science hasn't fully explained this subject. If it had we'd be taught biology very differently. When my Ochem teacher publishes his paper I'll be sure to link it.

[radditsu]

Dear root stop being a troll and film that sex tape for me.

[kylok]

p99 sex scandal would win RnF thread of the year, if not all time.

[kylok]

@ DrKvothe after doing some light reading on the subject on Homochirality I found some information that was pretty consistent with what my ochem teacher was telling me - "The emergence of chirality consensus as a natural autoamplification process has been associated with the 2nd law of thermodynamics." He's got a PhD in physical chemistry and a main portion of his research dealt with converting the equation for mixing entropy from intensive to extensive. He has done this successfully btw - so get ready for some books to get big fat addendums added to 'em.

[Estolcles]

p99 sex scandal would win RnF thread of the year, if not all time.

Yeah, but the question is what would be the scandal?

It'd have to be someone getting platz from one of the devs because someone has a pic of them sucking off Katrik while being buttfucked by Secrets. Or HBB being revealed as the ACTUAL Platlord. Or something along those lines.

[Langrisserx]

+10 very good. Science hasn't fully explained this subject. If it had we'd be taught biology very differently. When my Ochem teacher publishes his paper I'll be sure to link it.

Who knows but SPINNING around shit sure seems to be a recurrent theme in our whole shitfest of a universe!!~ perfect spheres of .. what... little strings... wahoooo


http://phys.org/news/2013-09-scientists-never-before-seen.html
Scientists create never-before-seen form of matter

Working with colleagues at the Harvard-MIT Center for Ultracold Atoms, a group led by Harvard Professor of Physics Mikhail Lukin and MIT Professor of Physics Vladan Vuletic have managed to coax photons into binding together to form molecules – a state of matter that, until recently, had been purely theoretical. The work is described in a September 25 paper in Nature.






http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.101101
Black Holes Emerge from Collisions
https://d22izw7byeupn1.cloudfront.net/journals/PHYSICS/synopses/images/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.101101 (http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.101101)



one thing is for sure, someone not from this board will figure it out

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/09/us-nobel-chemistry-idUSBRE9980AO20131009

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-spirals-electronics.html#nRlv

and yes dr hawking n Co already figured out how to resolve the religion/science conflict.

http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2010/09/hawking-mlodinow-no-theory-of_30.html

ur all just a bunch of babes among babies among spinning orbs OR ARE YOU

[DrKvothe]

@ DrKvothe after doing some light reading on the subject on Homochirality I found some information that was pretty consistent with what my ochem teacher was telling me - "The emergence of chirality consensus as a natural autoamplification process has been associated with the 2nd law of thermodynamics." He's got a PhD in physical chemistry and a main portion of his research dealt with converting the equation for mixing entropy from intensive to extensive. He has done this successfully btw - so get ready for some books to get big fat addendums added to 'em.

assuming a selfreplicator must be homochiral (or nearly) the spontaneous formation of such a molecule from a racemic monomer pool is exponentially less likely than from a homochiral pool. The chance of a polymer length n being homochiral from a racemic pool is 1 in .5^n. The generation of a homochiral pool of monomers makes molecular selfreplicators much more likely to arise, but few reasonable scenarios have been published to date. If we knew what molecules actually made up the first molecular selfreplicator, we could probably figure it out...

[Langrisserx]

the "handedness" doesnt exist in other dimensions so it had to emerge in ours. go to sleep.

[kylok]

Big Hurb is my new hero

[myriverse]

If evolution is real than how come their is monkeys?

darwininians 0
lord 1
If god is real, how come not everybody goes to heaven?

[Gaffin 3.0]

http://i44.tinypic.com/x3vp00.jpg

[Csihar]

I don't get why people want God to be real. He's a vicious cunt.

[myriverse]

I don't get why people want God to be real. He's a vicious cunt.
It basically comes down to self-loathing.

[Laugher]

even if you explained abiogenesis you dont explain genesis

http://i.imgur.com/vbIuIwL.jpg + http://i.imgur.com/P4eBWDk.jpg = http://i.imgur.com/REjaNct.jpg

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

First, I would like to state that I do believe in God. That being said, I would like to offer a personal experience that just reinforced my belief.

My wife and I are currently changing career paths in our lives. I have been involved in the political realm for well over a decade and have a degree in Political Science. My wife has a degree and is working in Dentistry. We decided to go into Nursing, which is a huge switch for me (I am not a hard sciences guy). This brings me to my point. Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated. I am sure many of you disagree, and you have every right to do so, but I just thought I would weigh in.

[Argh]

atheism = religion

[Pico]

when u understand why u dismiss all other possible gods, then u will udnerstand why i dismiss anal beads

[p99soundsok]

There is no way we will ever be able to fully understand our physical universe. We will never know when it was created and we will never know how fast it is expanding. The Bible said that humans will never be able to comprehend how vast the universe is and that everything will be ultimately destroyed at the end of God's timetable for humans. If accurate, this would mean our entire universe is destroyed along with Earth.


Taking the agnostic viewpoint, our universe is just one set of countless other universes that could be linked together. Ours is just a reaction that is still occurring. We are too primitive to travel to other solar systems or galaxies and the ill fate of our Earth will probably be decided before we can accomplish such feats.

[Jarnauga]

Not collectioning stamps is a hobby.

[Orruar]

First, I would like to state that I do believe in God. That being said, I would like to offer a personal experience that just reinforced my belief.

My wife and I are currently changing career paths in our lives. I have been involved in the political realm for well over a decade and have a degree in Political Science. My wife has a degree and is working in Dentistry. We decided to go into Nursing, which is a huge switch for me (I am not a hard sciences guy). This brings me to my point. Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated. I am sure many of you disagree, and you have every right to do so, but I just thought I would weigh in.

Poli sci major who considers nursing to be a hard science thinks evolution is bullshit.

[Kagatob]

Not collectioning stamps is a hobby.

Zing!

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Poli sci major who considers nursing to be a hard science thinks evolution is bullshit.

I am not exactly sure how that was meant to come across, but I take it you're a neurosurgeon? lol. How well did you do in Physiology? Pathophysiology? Anatomy? Pharmacology? Molecular and Organic Chemistry? Me? 3.8 (yes Physiology was kind of tough. I'll give you that), 4.0, 4.0, 4.0, 4.0. and 4.0. My grades do not constitute the difficulty of the courses, but rather the degree of time and effort I put into my studies. The college I go to had 75 slots open for my starting semester; 12 got accepted. The minimum GPA was a 3.6 and the lowest H.E.S.I. score was a 94%. Depending on where you take nursing, it can be every bit as hard as med school, just not as long, but I am sure you know that already. <sarcasm off>

And when I say hard science I mean..."Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms used to compare scientific fields on the basis of perceived methodological rigor and legitimacy. Roughly speaking, the natural sciences are considered "hard" while the social sciences are usually described as "soft"." Again, I am sure you already know that.

I guess next time you have a serious injury or disease you will be able to take care of it yourself huh? haha. Just make sure to let them know you do not want anesthesia prior to surgery. That way you can walk them through it and make sure they don't mess up...haha.

I pity the nurse and doctor that will end up having to look after you.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Yeah except all of the prereq courses are introductory courses, which definitely never qualify as "hard science" lol.

I'm sorry. I don't think the chronically unemployed, man-children are allowed an opinion when it comes to the adults talking about jobs HBB. Just sit in your little hovel in Watts or Englewood or wherever it is your housing benefits permit you to live, and suck the tit of the Govt. while the Men have a discussion.

[Orruar]

I am not exactly sure how that was meant to come across, but I take it you're a neurosurgeon? lol. How well did you do in Physiology? Pathophysiology? Anatomy? Pharmacology? Molecular and Organic Chemistry? Me? 3.8 (yes Physiology was kind of tough. I'll give you that), 4.0, 4.0, 4.0, 4.0. and 4.0. My grades do not constitute the difficulty of the courses, but rather the degree of time and effort I put into my studies. The college I go to had 75 slots open for my starting semester; 12 got accepted. The minimum GPA was a 3.6 and the lowest H.E.S.I. score was a 94%. Depending on where you take nursing, it can be every bit as hard as med school, just not as long, but I am sure you know that already. <sarcasm off>

And when I say hard science I mean..."Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms used to compare scientific fields on the basis of perceived methodological rigor and legitimacy. Roughly speaking, the natural sciences are considered "hard" while the social sciences are usually described as "soft"." Again, I am sure you already know that.

I guess next time you have a serious injury or disease you will be able to take care of it yourself huh? haha. Just make sure to let them know you do not want anesthesia prior to surgery. That way you can walk them through it and make sure they don't mess up...haha.

I pity the nurse and doctor that will end up having to look after you.

Biology is no more a hard science than computer science. The only parts that are anywhere near a hard science are the pharma parts that involve a good deal of chemistry. But nursing is pretty damn far from all of that. How many truly scientific studies do they do in nursing? Very few. I can understand that you consider it much more of a hard science than the tea leaf reading of poli sci. But if you ever study physics or chemistry in detail, you'll see what a hard science really is.

[Itap]

I am not exactly sure how that was meant to come across, but I take it you're a neurosurgeon? lol. How well did you do in Physiology? Pathophysiology? Anatomy? Pharmacology? Molecular and Organic Chemistry? Me? 3.8 (yes Physiology was kind of tough. I'll give you that), 4.0, 4.0, 4.0, 4.0. and 4.0. My grades do not constitute the difficulty of the courses, but rather the degree of time and effort I put into my studies. The college I go to had 75 slots open for my starting semester; 12 got accepted. The minimum GPA was a 3.6 and the lowest H.E.S.I. score was a 94%. Depending on where you take nursing, it can be every bit as hard as med school, just not as long, but I am sure you know that already. <sarcasm off>

And when I say hard science I mean..."Hard science and soft science are colloquial terms used to compare scientific fields on the basis of perceived methodological rigor and legitimacy. Roughly speaking, the natural sciences are considered "hard" while the social sciences are usually described as "soft"." Again, I am sure you already know that.

I guess next time you have a serious injury or disease you will be able to take care of it yourself huh? haha. Just make sure to let them know you do not want anesthesia prior to surgery. That way you can walk them through it and make sure they don't mess up...haha.

I pity the nurse and doctor that will end up having to look after you.

You sound quite intelligent, but you are being trolled. you dun goofd

[Sidelle]

I don't know if I believe in God or not but I believe in the Borg Collective. They're coming to assimilate us any day now and resistance is futile.

[Lune]

Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design.

http://i.imgur.com/KUhKSSz.jpg

I just thought I would weigh in.

All that education and you still have an utterly moronic worldview, weighing in with the most uneducated opinions. It's embarrassing.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Biology is no more a hard science than computer science. The only parts that are anywhere near a hard science are the pharma parts that involve a good deal of chemistry. But nursing is pretty damn far from all of that. How many truly scientific studies do they do in nursing? Very few. I can understand that you consider it much more of a hard science than the tea leaf reading of poli sci. But if you ever study physics or chemistry in detail, you'll see what a hard science really is.

Well obviously you guys are too "scientifically minded" to understand English. Refer to my post that differentiated hard and soft sciences. And explain to me how physiology, anatomy, pathophysiology, and organic chemistry are not "hard' sciences. Hard sciences=natural, soft sciences=social. If you are not sure what those words mean, look them up.

I never said that the sciences that I am taking are as difficult as the ones you are leading me to believe you have taken (although I feel you haven't taken them either...and there is no reason for me to do so to begin with. I could guarantee I would ace them however.), but to try and make fun of someone for bettering themselves in life by ripping on the classes they are taking for a chosen major is really, really pathetic. Just saying.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

You sound quite intelligent, but you are being trolled. you dun goofd

I see what you mean. Point well taken. I am done here...haha.

[Orruar]

I pity the nurse and doctor that will end up having to look after you.

Also, what does this even mean? How do my views of the biological sciences affect how the nurse or doctor takes care of me? I'm sure I won't be as easy as most patients, as I'm more prone to ask important questions, instead of just yielding to your supposed intelligence, but any doctor I want to do business with will enjoy such questions, not find them difficult.

[Kagatob]

I'm sorry. I don't think the chronically unemployed, man-children are allowed an opinion when it comes to the adults talking about jobs HBB. Just sit in your little hovel in Watts or Englewood or wherever it is your housing benefits permit you to live, and suck the tit of the Govt. while the Men have a discussion.

I found a new favorite poster while Gotrocks is on hiatus.

[r00t]

Pretty sure the mathematical properties that govern the stability of our universe are proof enough that creation was not an accident. DNA databases and the complex systems they confer is like cherry on top of the proverbial cake. Eat it atheists

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

http://i.imgur.com/KUhKSSz.jpg



All that education and you still have an utterly moronic worldview, weighing in with the most uneducated opinions. It's embarrassing.

Ok, one last one, then I will be off. So your argument for evolution, and against God is a photo of a family with Achondroplasia? That is your argument, and you say I am coming from a place of uneducated opinions? That means nothing. You might as well have put up a photo of a pencil or a phone. What does that even mean? I have an idea, but I want you to put together an intelligent thought and convey it here, for us to see. This thought needs to come from a place of "educated opinions". You, my friend, are embarrassing. Later all!

[Lune]

Pretty sure the mathematical properties that govern the stability of our universe are proof enough that creation was not an accident. DNA databases and the complex systems they confer is like cherry on top of the proverbial cake. Eat it atheists

All this talk of eating, cake, cherries on top of things. You been spending too much time with tralina?

[r00t]

it is impossible to calculate the entropy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory)) of even a small amount of segments of hydrocarbons naturally forming into a dna strand.

then why the randomness to have a mechanism to self replicate? youre defying common sense

[Orruar]

Well obviously you guys are too "scientifically minded" to understand English. Refer to my post that differentiated hard and soft sciences. And explain to me how physiology, anatomy, pathophysiology, and organic chemistry are not "hard' sciences. Hard sciences=natural, soft sciences=social. If you are not sure what those words mean, look them up.

I never said that the sciences that I am taking are as difficult as the ones you are leading me to believe you have taken (although I feel you haven't taken them either...and there is no reason for me to do so to begin with. I could guarantee I would ace them however.), but to try and make fun of someone for bettering themselves in life by ripping on the classes they are taking for a chosen major is really, really pathetic. Just saying.

Holy shit you are a defensive little prick, aren't you. I never ripped on your nursing degree. My brother has a nursing degree, so I'm hardly biased against them. I was just saying that thinking nursing is some kind of hard science is laughable, and doesn't add legitimacy to your opinion on evolution, which you implied it did. The hardness of a science is not a simple true/false value, but a continuum. Yes, there are sciences far softer than the biological sciences, but there are many that are much harder. Your degree is somewhere in between. Calling it a hard science is a bit misleading and pretentious.

Also, I thought people who believed in god were supposed to be humble? Don't they still teach humility at church? How does a sentence like "I could guarantee I would ace them however." fit in with that? I'll tell you how it fits in. It shows you are incredibly ignorant of a great part of this world, evolution being just one small area of your ignorance. I'm sure that in the realm of poli sci, you always did well to pretend you knew more than you did. That's not gonna fly in your new career. So please correct this tendency before you get people killed.

[r00t]

the big bang theory doesnt even explain existence as you atheists naturally go to to explain genesis. It simply gives definition of measurable time being a side effect of matter. You can still talk philosophically about immeasurable time, ie. what was there in the infinity before the bang

[kylok]

many lulz in this thread. Hate to burst your bubble Boggwin but you're only at the tip of the iceberg of "hard science". Take a few high end physics classes or physical chemistry, where they explain the how and why of you're supposed "intelligent design" then come back to me. Also - modern biology is firmly rooted in Darwinian evolution type logic so I'm not quite sure where you're pulling ID out of any bio class that isn't taught out of the humanities department. I can definitely understand your biased towards the intelligent design view point as you were probably raised with it, and repeatedly reinforce that brainwashing by going to church weekly. That being said, as a scientist, the hypothesis of intelligent design is TERRIBLE fucking science. I'll break it down for you as you clearly do not understand scientific method (what makes science science, as opposed to playing pin the tail on the donkey with origin theories). Hypothesis -> Experiment -> Results. If the results do not agree with the hypothesis you start over, you DO NOT tweak the experiment or fudge the hypothesis a little to match your results. What you have done is observed human biology, done no testing, and concluded that god (purposeful lowercase) made man. This is analogous to me saying look, the moon looks like cheese, I bet the moon is made of cheese, since I lack the knowledge and resources to test my hypothesis, I'll conclude that the moon is made of cheese - since I like cheese. Believe what you will but don't come and try to say that it's anything other than belief (not logic based). Imo stick to poli sci you're probably too old to adjust to mindset properly to do good science.

[r00t]

I still precribe to the theory that we are living in the computer simulation of an advanced species

[kylok]

r00t just stop, you're spouting old ass rhetoric that has generally proven to be false, if you want me to line by line it I will but you can use Google as well as the next ape.

[Orruar]

Root, do you get at all concerned when you make about 20 posts and nobody responds to any of them? Does that not tip you off that what you're saying is of no interest to anyone at all?

[r00t]

Besides the fact that people do, hence over 100 replies in this thread copy pasted off some christian website

[kylok]

Oh and it is absolutely possible to calculate the entropy of DNA - my O chem professor figured it out in 6 months, just waiting on publishing.

[Orruar]

Besides the fact that people do, hence over 100 replies in this thread copy pasted off some christian website

Yeah, you're good at starting conversations. Not so good at seeing them through to completion.

[r00t]

r00t just stop, you're spouting old ass rhetoric that has generally proven to be false, if you want me to line by line it I will but you can use Google as well as the next ape.

quite on the contrary, there is more evidence that we are living in a computer simulation than there is evidence in the broken ass fossil record for evolution, yet you have no trouble believing everything spoonfed to you in school. Some of the more interesting parts of the theory are that quantum physicists have discovered particles use the same crc32 checksum ias nvented by a computer scientist in the 1960s. The speed of light being the maximum speed of the CPU. I could go on, but maybe you should try as your suggestion states and Google this very fascinating stuff.

[kylok]

And I'm being made physically sick by the rampant misuse of the word theory

A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory.

[r00t]

Who is misusing the word theory and causing the confusion, besides evolutionists

[Lune]

Ok, one last one, then I will be off. So your argument for evolution, and against God is a photo of a family with Achondroplasia? That is your argument, and you say I am coming from a place of uneducated opinions? That means nothing. You might as well have put up a photo of a pencil or a phone. What does that even mean? I have an idea, but I want you to put together an intelligent thought and convey it here, for us to see. This thought needs to come from a place of "educated opinions". You, my friend, are embarrassing. Later all!

You must not be a very good nurse. Surely you've learned about antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals, like MRSA?. And you don't even know how they got to be that way? I'll give you a hint: God didn't make them resistant to beta lactam antibiotics.

[r00t]

bacteria turning into more bacteria is proof that god doesnt exist

[kylok]

quite on the contrary, there is more evidence that we are living in a computer simulation than there is evidence in the broken ass fossil record for evolution, yet you have no trouble believing everything spoonfed to you in school. Some of the more interesting parts of the theory are that quantum physicists have discovered particles use the same crc32 checksum ias nvented by a computer scientist in the 1960s. The speed of light being the maximum speed of the CPU. I could go on, but maybe you should try as your suggestion states and Google this very fascinating stuff.

I would absolutely love to read this supposed evidence. Everything you just stated is correlation not causation. Coincidence =/= Divinity. The speed of light is the maximum speed of everything, from the prospective of a photon travel is instantaneous (try and reconcile that with human perspective). Quantum physics doesn't discover particles, particle physicists do that - and furthermore in the field of QM nothing is directly observed as it changes the results. Nice try and I didn't even have to google for that.

[r00t]

you say tomato I say tomato

[Orruar]

Some of the more interesting parts of the theory are that quantum physicists have discovered particles use the same crc32 checksum ias nvented by a computer scientist in the 1960s. ... I could go on, but maybe you should try as your suggestion states and Google this very fascinating stuff.

So I took your advice and googled this. And apparently it's not quantum physics, but rather biologists that discovered checksum-like behavior in DNA. Is it really a leap of logic to think that natural evolution developed a technique for double checking the fidelity of copying that is somewhat similar to something people developed? I mean, there are certain problems in the physical world that both DNA and humans must overcome. Is it crazy to think we'd find similar solutions?

Finally, to take all that to the the logical conclusion that we're in a computer simulation somewhere is just... lol. You sound like Joe Rogan. You want to believe crazy shit so fucking bad that you'll take huge leaps of logic to get there. Have you looked into Scientology? Might be a good fit for you.

[r00t]

If you accepted that we are living in a computer simulated reality, you would have to concede the creator is our GOD

But, you believe that everything is too complex to be a computer simulation, thus there is no God

Do you see the fallacy

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Oh and it is absolutely possible to calculate the entropy of DNA - my O chem professor figured it out in 6 months, just waiting on publishing.

I'll skip all of the assumptions you wrote about me, (Assumptions, wow, how scientific is that? Is that the scientific method you were lecturing me about?) and go straight to your problem. You, like so many arrogant college science students before you, think you have everything figured out, and that is laughable. Some of science's greatest minds believed they knew it all too. The earth was flat. Our solar system revolved around the Earth. Spontaneous generation. Blank slate theory. Cold fusion. Static Universe. The list is goes on and on. The things you think are proven fact now, will be as laughable as many we now look back on. Go on parroting the drivel you hear in school and wake up. You look childish. (kind of like that guy in the bar in Good Will Hunting)

[kylok]

If you accepted that we are living in a computer simulated reality, you would have to concede the creator is our GOD

But, you believe that everything is too complex to be a computer simulation, thus there is no God

Do you see the fallacy

The fallacy is that you assume what I believe. I don't believe in a single goddamn thing, I personally hate that word and avoid it at all costs. That one word and the idea behind it has been the greatest plague of humanity, far worse than anything else I can think of.

[r00t]

You have to believe one way or the other, otherwise you are a vegetable

[r00t]

You simply can't use the "ignorant" form of atheism definition in modern society

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

You must not be a very good nurse. Surely you've learned about antibiotic resistant bacteria in hospitals, like MRSA?. And you don't even know how they got to be that way? I'll give you a hint: God didn't make them resistant to beta lactam antibiotics.

No they adapted. Not evolved. Two different things. They did not become Y. Pestis did they? They are still S. aureus, just resistant due to exposure. Next!

And by the way, I am not a nurse. I am in nursing school. Try reading next time.

[r00t]

I'll skip all of the assumptions you wrote about me, (Assumptions, wow, how scientific is that? Is that the scientific method you were lecturing me about?) and go straight to your problem. You, like so many arrogant college science students before you, think you have everything figured out, and that is laughable. Some of science's greatest minds believed they knew it all too. The earth was flat. Our solar system revolved around the Earth. Spontaneous generation. Blank slate theory. Cold fusion. Static Universe. The list is goes on and on. The things you think are proven fact now, will be as laughable as many we now look back on. Go on parroting the drivel you hear in school and wake up. You look childish. (kind of like that guy in the bar in Good Will Hunting)

This is why I believe macroevolution will one day be proven false. There is simply an enormous lack of evidence for it whatsoever.

[Orruar]

If you accepted that we are living in a computer simulated reality, you would have to concede the creator is our GOD

But, you believe that everything is too complex to be a computer simulation, thus there is no God

Do you see the fallacy

I see the fallacy. You introduced a pretty obvious strawman in the second sentence. Who said things are too complex to be a computer simulation? Further, who said that this then implied there is no god?

Question: Assuming there is a god(s), is/are they omniscient?

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Ok. I really do need to go now. Got to study for my retard classes...lol. Hopefully I can figure how to open my book.

[r00t]

I see the fallacy. You introduced a pretty obvious strawman in the second sentence. Who said things are too complex to be a computer simulation? Further, who said that this then implied there is no god?

Question: Assuming there is a god(s), is/are they omniscient?

No strawman. He stated it was too complex by trying to explain it away with the speed of photons and shit. He has implied there is no god in virtually every post.

[Orruar]

... Some of science's greatest minds believed they knew it all too. The earth was flat. Our solar system revolved around the Earth. Spontaneous generation. Blank slate theory. Cold fusion. Static Universe. The list is goes on and on. ...

More to add to the list:
Zeus
Thor
Jehovah

[kylok]

I'll skip all of the assumptions you wrote about me, (Assumptions, wow, how scientific is that? Is that the scientific method you were lecturing me about?) and go straight to your problem. You, like so many arrogant college science students before you, think you have everything figured out, and that is laughable. Some of science's greatest minds believed they knew it all too. The earth was flat. Our solar system revolved around the Earth. Spontaneous generation. Blank slate theory. Cold fusion. Static Universe. The list is goes on and on. The things you think are proven fact now, will be as laughable as many we now look back on. Go on parroting the drivel you hear in school and wake up. You look childish. (kind of like that guy in the bar in Good Will Hunting)

I responded to your posted based on its content. Re-read this damn thread where I explained the difference between mixing entropy (intensive) and the new entropy (he's calling it nodal and differential entropy) which is extensive. You are assuming that this is a hypothesis, it is not. It has been proven mathematically and is a perfect model. I do not use the word perfect lightly. And if I'm the guy in the bar in Good Will Hunting you're Ben Aflec. If anyone is taking what they've been spoon fed at face value it's you. If I appear childish it's cause... I'm 24, I know huge surprise right? You're in RnF don't get too butthurt man.

[DrKvothe]

Boggwin, your chosen profession is an admirable one, but I agree with those flaming you that your education doesn't qualify you to make broad scientific statements. To be fair, an MD wouldn't qualify you either. These are not degrees that vigorously enforce the scientific method, nor do they require in depth investigation through the published peer-reviewed research literature.

Medical doctors who want to conduct research typically need a phd as well as their MD. They also typically conduct supervised postdoctoral research before they're deemed qualified to lead their own research program.

The physical evidence does not support the conclusion that all species initially coexisted. The fossil record is quite convincing that more primitive species once existed but have gone extinct and that many modern species appear to have arisen fairly recently. Evolution has proven to be a powerful optimization algorithm within observable timeframes. Consider the Lenski experiment, or even the results of intentional breeding which gave rise to all modern domesticated species.

Creationism's strongest argument is that no other theory is possible. The scientific community does not agree with this assertion. At the molecular level, life is messy and filled with artifacts that suggest nonrational development. The elegance you suggest demands a creator is entirely inelegant from a molecular biology view.

[r00t]

And God would definitely be omniscient over anything in our understanding after designing every aspect of our systems. It's like if you asked Linus Torvalds about Git

[kylok]

Boggwin, your chosen profession is an admirable one, but I agree with those flaming you that your education doesn't qualify you to make broad scientific statements. To be fair, an MD wouldn't qualify you either. These are not degrees that vigorously enforce the scientific method, nor do they require in depth investigation through the published peer-reviewed research literature.

Medical doctors who want to conduct research typically need a phd as well as their MD. They also typically conduct supervised postdoctoral research before they're deemed qualified to lead their own research program.

The physical evidence does not support the conclusion that all species initially coexisted. The fossil record is quite convincing that more primitive species once existed but have gone extinct and that many modern species appear to have arisen fairly recently. Evolution has proven to be a powerful optimization algorithm within observable timeframes. Consider the Lenski experiment, or even the results of intentional breeding which gave rise to all modern domesticated species.

Creationism's strongest argument is that no other theory is possible. The scientific community does not agree with this assertion. At the molecular level, life is messy and filled with artifacts that suggest nonrational development. The elegance you suggest demands a creator is entirely inelegant from a molecular biology view.
OMG this thank you thank you thank you for taking the time to write that out coherently.

[kylok]

R00t who the fuck are you to make assumptions about a hypothetical omniscient being? Please find me some evidence of "God" that isn't man made or random correlation.

[Orruar]

And God would definitely be omniscient over anything in our understanding after designing every aspect of our systems. It's like if you asked Linus Torvalds about Git

Computer science researchers run programs all the time where they are pretty ignorant as to the details of what is going on inside. This is not because they are stupid, but because the complexity they create is beyond their ability to digest it easily. Nor would it be worthwhile to bother understanding every minor detail. How do you know we aren't just a program being run by some grad student who doesn't really know much beyond the large scale structure of the universe? Maybe the only visualization they see is the spiderweb of galaxy clusters and filaments.

[kylok]

And for further clarification I consider myself an agnostic, can't prove or disprove the existence of deities. I base all of my decisions and thinking on the empirical modified by a few key assumptions such as base 10 arithmetic.

[r00t]

If they were a lazy grad student copy pasting from stackoverflow they would not be our true creator but merely a demigod.

[kylok]

Computer science researchers run programs all the time where they are pretty ignorant as to the details of what is going on inside. This is not because they are stupid, but because the complexity they create is beyond their ability to digest it easily. Nor would it be worthwhile to bother understanding every minor detail. How do you know we aren't just a program being run by some grad student who doesn't really know much beyond the large scale structure of the universe? Maybe the only visualization they see is the spiderweb of galaxy clusters and filaments.

This is why Feinman was reduced to drawing pictures to "explain" what he thought was going on in quantum mechanics, the math is simply too difficult.

[Orruar]

If they were a lazy grad student copy pasting from stackoverflow they would not be our true creator but merely a demigod.

Ah, it's good to see that you continue to maintain such a rigorous and exacting scientific approach to understanding the universe. Root has decreed it to be and so thus it is.

[r00t]

My approach to science is the correct way because I question everything and don't accept a fossil record with like 4 fossils of monkeys saying I am a monkey

[kylok]

This brings me to my point. Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything.

Please concisely explain the function of the appendix, and if you can manage that problem number two will be explaining consciousness and how that fits into a human being - since human bodies are perfect machines and all. Some people see Jesus in their soap scum, I just see a mess.

[kylok]

My approach to science is the correct way because I question everything and don't accept a fossil record with like 4 fossils of monkeys saying I am a monkey

This is a great example of how people are not created equal, and should not have equal rights. You can choose to reject good science if you want to, but you're just putting your head in the sand. If fundamentalist christians had their way we'd still be in the dark ages, notice how when science went out to lunch we recall that period of history as the dark ages....

[r00t]

This is a great example of how people are not created equal, and should not have equal rights. You can choose to reject good science if you want to, but you're just putting your head in the sand. If fundamentalist christians had their way we'd still be in the dark ages, notice how when science went out to lunch we recall that period of history as the dark ages....

You talk as a tyrant because atheism has no morals

[DrKvothe]

Additionally, we've identified the molecular solutions that microorganisms have developed to protect themselves against antibiotics. In some cases, general xenobiotic enzymes are mutated to accept these new molecules as substrates, allowing them to catalyze chemical reactions which inactivate the antibiotics by changing their molecular structures and interrupting their function as potent protein inhibitors. In other cases general efflux pumpes are mutated to remove the antibiotic from the cell, keeping it below the working concentration. In other cases, the protein targets of the antibiotics have mutated, and the antibiotic no longer properly inhibits them. In other cases, horizontal gene transfer appears to be the culprit. The vast majority of antibiotics are natural compounds or semi synthetic derivatives of natural compounds. The biosynthetic machinery of these compounds evolved as weapons factories in a molecular arms race between microbes competing for nutrients. The microbial host that produces the antibiotic has to have its own resistance mechanism, and the theft of the genetic code for this resistance (horizontal gene transfer) allows a previously susceptible organism to gain resistance.

All of these mechanisms are genetically encoded, and their appearance represents a chance in the genetic code which is subsequently heritable. That's fucking evolution.

[August]

Please concisely explain the function of the appendix, and if you can manage that problem number two will be explaining consciousness and how that fits into a human being - since human bodies are perfect machines and all. Some people see Jesus in their soap scum, I just see a mess.

I thought I recently read something suggesting that the appendix is kind of like a 'seed bank' for all the bacteria that live in your gut to aid in digestion - if your intestinal track got wiped out of all the 'probiotics' the appendix is there to save the day.

Also arguing over religion is probably one of the biggest wastes of time that I can imagine. It's utterly pointless to argue with people who only accept one world view as correct. Your insistence that there are other ways to look at life is an abrupt decay to their entire framework of existence - something so scary that they can only refute your points and cling to their fundamentalist views that insist upon the re-telling of thousands of years worth of stories conjured by earlier civilization to explain natural phenomena.

I'm perfectly fine with saying 'i don't know - maybe you're right'.

[kylok]

Science hardly explains everything, but at least what it does explain is more or less indisputable (not talking about advanced physics, more like Newtonian).

[kylok]

I'm perfectly fine with saying 'i don't know - maybe you're right'.

You're a better man than I. I have a hard time saying that when someone's in my face telling me why their flying spaghetti monster is real.

[r00t]

Science hardly explains everything, but at least what it does explain is more or less indisputable (not talking about advanced physics, more like Newtonian).

Yes, Newton's Laws are fine, the theory of evolution cannot be claimed as fact

[kylok]

You talk as a tyrant because atheism has no morals

I prefer benevolent dictator, but tomato tomato.

Please stop referring to me as an atheist as I am not. I have a personal moral code that is not based on some over told stories, but instead by life experience.

[kylok]

Yes, Newton's Laws are fine, the theory of evolution cannot be claimed as fact

It's not fact. It is the best, more accurate, and so far generally accepted model of how life has changed over time supported by the scientific method. You're arguing that I can't prove evolution, what I'm saying is open your eyes and look around - the world's the way it is for a reason. I just don't think that reason is because some dude with a beard in the sky made it that way, cause if he did he did a sloppy ass job and I would not employ his services again. For me to consider intelligent design in any sort of serious way I would need to see a substantial amount of perfection in the entirety of the universe that is simply not there. Something happened a very long time ago, between now and then more stuff happened that isn't well understood. What is well understood is that we're at the place we are now. As a much wiser person posted above me - this is a futile pursuit.

[August]

You're a better man than I. I have a hard time saying that when someone's in my face telling me why their flying spaghetti monster is real.

All hail his noodly appendage!

I think my biggest hangup is that even if you do explain how we got here, with science, we're still forgetting a bigger picture. Yes, you can show that this leads to that and yadda yadda due to some laws or theories or whatever the fuck.

What about the backdrop to that. What about the framework? Isn't there something magical about commenting about the observable universe? Why is the gravitational constant what it is? Why does the gravitational field have an inverse relationship with distance? These are observable, provable things that we accept because they're constant. Did something not define that? And if you can prove that something, non-god-related, DID define that, then what defined that source?

We're beings that are extremely limited in our capabilities compared to the observable universe. Is it far-fetched to believe in other dimensions that are impacting ours? Things completely unobservable to us by any current means? We very well could be some ancient beings dreamworld. We could be stuck in a black hole within a black hole within a black hole with all our constants being defined by our level of immersion (we're in too deep) inside a recursive black hole loop.

The point is, we can't know, not yet anyways. So yeah, maybe god is a white dude with a beard who sent his son here. I don't think so, but maybe? Maybe he's a flying spaghetti monster - but then who cooked his noodles? Who put that pot on the stove and turned up the celestial burner? Arguing for a specific world-view is absolutely crazy because there's no way that any of you can prove that you're right. I understand everyone wants to feel like you have a place in this world but too fucking bad.

[JayN]

http://pagestat.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/100-dollar-bill-new.jpg

Here is your god bitches, now get back to work!

[Orruar]

My approach to science is the correct way because I question everything and don't accept a fossil record with like 4 fossils of monkeys saying I am a monkey

But you accept an omniscient god because any creator that isn't omniscient would just be a demi god. It's solid logic. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

[JayN]

we all know we are a slave race created by aliens, duh facking morans

[mgellan]

I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything.

Google "laryngeal nerve of the giraffe" (which is obviously the most obvious evidence of the sheer stupidity of intelligent design - also present in "perfect" humans) and explain to me how routing a nerve from the head around the heart back into the head is "intelligent". Why are humans built such that we can't breathe and swallow at the same time? Choking used to be the largest source of accidental death in children, are you saying god designed people so millions of kids died on purpose?

People who are proponents of intelligent design are also completely unable to articulate what the mechanism for this phenomena is. For a complete treatment on why ID is stupid read "The Devil In Dover" and educate yourself.

Regards,
Mg

[kylok]

All hail his noodly appendage!

I think my biggest hangup is that even if you do explain how we got here, with science, we're still forgetting a bigger picture. Yes, you can show that this leads to that and yadda yadda due to some laws or theories or whatever the fuck.

What about the backdrop to that. What about the framework? Isn't there something magical about commenting about the observable universe? Why is the gravitational constant what it is? Why does the gravitational field have an inverse relationship with distance? These are observable, provable things that we accept because they're constant. Did something not define that? And if you can prove that something, non-god-related, DID define that, then what defined that source?

We're beings that are extremely limited in our capabilities compared to the observable universe. Is it far-fetched to believe in other dimensions that are impacting ours? Things completely unobservable to us by any current means? We very well could be some ancient beings dreamworld. We could be stuck in a black hole within a black hole within a black hole with all our constants being defined by our level of immersion (we're in too deep) inside a recursive black hole loop.

The point is, we can't know, not yet anyways. So yeah, maybe god is a white dude with a beard who sent his son here. I don't think so, but maybe? Maybe he's a flying spaghetti monster - but then who cooked his noodles? Who put that pot on the stove and turned up the celestial burner? Arguing for a specific world-view is absolutely crazy because there's no way that any of you can prove that you're right. I understand everyone wants to feel like you have a place in this world but too fucking bad.

That's it, August wins ForumQuest.

Personally I think that constants are the way they are because... that's the way they are. What makes blue blue? As far as I can tell the only thing that defines colors is the fact that we can all agree on them (it can be argued that color is defined by frequency but that shafts the shit out of color blind people). I also don't busy myself with how and why we're here, I just accept that we are. I concern myself more with stupid shit like why salt dissolves in water and how nitriles are converted into acids, or why certain drugs have certain indications and effects while others do not. This last part I have a bit of a hard time with because human beings are so diverse on an individual basis which irks the scientists in me that wants things to be black and white.

[r00t]

http://pagestat.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/100-dollar-bill-new.jpg

Here is your god bitches, now get back to work!

They Live is a good movie

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fUue43k4YhY/UZeYdPKoI1I/AAAAAAAAG0c/BHsmS_ABDXk/s1600/3675They+Live.jpg http://massi.ch/other/thl/money.JPG

[mgellan]

You talk as a tyrant because atheism has no morals

Incorrect - society has evolved a secular morality that is morally superior to any religion that espouses iron age savagery. Societies that are sufficiently evolved will never countenance the imposition of relgious morals on that society - thats why most Western people consider Islamic Sharia law barbaric.

If not we would still be keeping slaves, killing our children by stoning if they don't honor their parents, and stoning adulterers and homosexuals. Its unfortunate that there are people (e.g. Tea Party nutcases) who would actually go back to morality as set forth in the Bible, but those of us who have a well developed secular morality (eg atheists and religious people who choose to ignore most of the Bible) will not permit such backsliding.

Religious morals is an oxymoron.

Regards,
Mg

[kylok]

Google "laryngeal nerve of the giraffe" (which is obviously the most obvious evidence of the sheer stupidity of intelligent design - also present in "perfect" humans) and explain to me how routing a nerve from the head around the heart back into the head is "intelligent". Why are humans built such that we can't breathe and swallow at the same time? Choking used to be the largest source of accidental death in children, are you saying god designed people so millions of kids died on purpose?


Great post, I lol'd.

Why are human beings built such that there's a waste pipeline right in the middle of a recreation area? God must be a civil engineer.

[kylok]

Incorrect - society has evolved a secular morality that is morally superior to any religion that espouses iron age savagery. Societies that are sufficiently evolved will never countenance the imposition of relgious morals on that society - thats why most Western people consider Islamic Sharia law barbaric.

If not we would still be keeping slaves, killing our children by stoning if they don't honor their parents, and stoning adulterers and homosexuals. Its unfortunate that there are people (e.g. Tea Party nutcases) who would actually go back to morality as set forth in the Bible, but those of us who have a well developed secular morality (eg atheists and religious people who choose to ignore most of the Bible) will not permit such backsliding.

Religious morals is an oxymoron.

Regards,
Mg
I love everything you say, please give us more and educate the ignorant.

[Kagatob]

You talk as a tyrant because atheism has no morals

Tell me more about how the fear of God is the only thing keeping you from killing people.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Boggwin, your chosen profession is an admirable one, but I agree with those flaming you that your education doesn't qualify you to make broad scientific statements.

For one, I gave an opinion, not a broad scientific statement. I stated nothing as fact in my original post. Second, my point on hard science dealt with the widely regarded degree in which sciences are measured. Again, Hard science being natural sciences and Soft science being social sciences. I am not referring to degrees of hardness or softness. So don't worry, you all are still "uber bestest" when it come to being to most hardcore of science nerds. I to be honest, I never thought I would convert an Atheist on an EQ emu server message board. I still think you are wrong, but I am not belittling you for thinking that way. And I am not attack you personally.

[kylok]

No ones attacking you, we're just asking you to sit at the kids table while the adults talk about boring stuff.

[kylok]

Just my opinion =D

[r00t]

http://rlv.zcache.com.au/beer_is_proof_that_god_loves_usand_wants_us_to_mou sepad-p144419097694349907envq7_400.jpg

[DrKvothe]

Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated.

This seems at odds with your last post.

[JayN]

http://markc1.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451bb2969e2015391ecf5f5970b-pi

[kylok]

http://rlv.zcache.com.au/beer_is_proof_that_god_loves_usand_wants_us_to_mou sepad-p144419097694349907envq7_400.jpg

Accepted as evidence of divinity. Beer is good.

[Orruar]

For one, I gave an opinion, not a broad scientific statement. I stated nothing as fact in my original post. Second, my point on hard science dealt with the widely regarded degree in which sciences are measured. Again, Hard science being natural sciences and Soft science being social sciences. I am not referring to degrees of hardness or softness. So don't worry, you all are still "uber bestest" when it come to being to most hardcore of science nerds. I to be honest, I never thought I would convert an Atheist on an EQ emu server message board. I still think you are wrong, but I am not belittling you for thinking that way. And I am not attack you personally.

If you had just given your opinion, nobody would have said anything. But you tried to use your education in nursing to assert some kind of authority. Maybe that kind of sloppy thinking cuts it at church, but not in science. Nobody gets to say something is simply because they have authority. Most people in the hard sciences understand this.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

This seems at odds with your last post.

Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated.

Please explain. Again, I guess you scientist cannot grasp the basics of the English language. This again, is my opinion.

[Orruar]

This seems at odds with your last post.

lol........

[r00t]

boggwin knockin it out the park

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

If you had just given your opinion, nobody would have said anything. But you tried to use your education in nursing to assert some kind of authority. Maybe that kind of sloppy thinking cuts it at church, but not in science. Nobody gets to say something is simply because they have authority. Most people in the hard sciences understand this.

Again assumptions. What makes you think I go to church? Because I believe in God? Wow, how scientific. You condensation is sad. Look at the words I used. They are in English. I put them in another post. If you are able to read, you will be able to see that I actually used the word OPINION! Is opinion fact? You are a scientist. I am sure you can figure it out.

[doeda]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=573794539374920&set=a.157796790974699.40772.157750900979288&type=1

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

No ones attacking you, we're just asking you to sit at the kids table while the adults talk about boring stuff.

AND THE AWARD FOR THE MOST CONDESCENDING PRICK GOES TO...

[DrKvothe]

When you state something as 'certain', you're not sharing an opinion. The only idea stated as an opinion was that evolutionists must be uneducated.

[kylok]

Having taken Med School level Anatomy and the health care nursing Physiology, I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc. I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything. The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life. It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated.

Please explain. Again, I guess you scientist cannot grasp the basics of the English language. This again, is my opinion.

Out of curiosity did you anatomy class include a lab?

Line by lining your obviously hasty post due to so much backtracking... lets see

"I have come to a conclusion that nothing in the design of the human body is by chance or mistake. It is a perfect computer/machine, with built in fail-safes, etc."
Human bodies are not perfect, they are quite flawed in many respects, if this is your opinion then it's not a very good one.

"I can never believe that over time we "evolved" from anything."
Beliefs are not based in science, imo they do little more than give people reasons to kill each other. And if you're bio teacher read that he'd slap you.

"The odds that the design of human bodies developed from some cellular organism swimming in primordial soup, is ridiculous. I am certain that this applies to all life."
The odds that anything happens ever are quite small - see quantum mechanics and/or a math major.

" It had to be created by intelligent design. You may call it something other than God, but to deny it is foolish, and in my opinion, uneducated."
Had to be my ass - prove it. Your opinion is your opinion and you're entitled to it, and if it is deemed stupid, dumb, or unproductive we the RnF community are entitled to troll the living shit out of you and prevent you from studying for your nursing classes. You are not the most educated person here, you are not a unique and delicate snowflake, you are being trolled and have successfully had your jimmies rustled as I believe someone pointed out a number of pages ago.

[Rail]

http://telliamedrevisited.wordpress.com/

Questioning the facts of evolution has been terminated.
Please re-educate yourself.

[kylok]

You condensation is sad.

As a scientist I am qualified to say that... umadbru. Either that or I'm a gas becoming a liquid, which is sad for some reason that is beyond my comprehension.

[kylok]

AND THE AWARD FOR THE MOST CONDESCENDING PRICK GOES TO...

Jelly of my shiny award? You sound jelly as fuck. Shit's gold-plated I understand why you'd be jelly.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Jelly of my shiny award? You sound jelly as fuck. Shit's gold-plated I understand why you'd be jelly.

Jelly? What are you a gansta now. Did you get butt-hurt cause I called you a prick? Really? Poor baby.

[kylok]

roflmao - jelly is extremely common internet slang having nothing to do with being "gangsta" which you so delicately misspelled. Clearly mad & jealous (for clarification).

[Orruar]

Again assumptions. What makes you think I go to church? Because I believe in God? Wow, how scientific. You condensation is sad. Look at the words I used. They are in English. I put them in another post. If you are able to read, you will be able to see that I actually used the word OPINION! Is opinion fact? You are a scientist. I am sure you can figure it out.

English words don't necessarily imply a well formed sentence, as you so aptly displayed.

Again assumptions. What makes you think I think you go to church? Because I said you display the same level of thinking as goes on at churches? Wow, how scientific. You meteorite is joyful for holidays. Look at the words I used. They are in English.

[kylok]

Seriously, I bet you'd make a great politician Boggwin. Are you super super sure you want to enter a world filled with the people that are opposing you in this thread? Cause there's a whole shit load of us and we have a low tolerance for people who are not patient, thorough, and well grounded in reality. Doesn't mean you can't believe in God, but it does mean you can't get your jimmies rustled so easily.

[DrKvothe]

Blindly religious folk tend to demonstrate the danger of religion in a very clear way. Your inability to think critically or adequately defend your own arguments is the consequence of your damaged brain twisting reality to fit your fairytale beliefs. Christians don't believe evolutionists have real evidence because their minds can't view anything objectively anymore. As the arguments against theism becomes more clearly and openly articulated, the mental gymnastics required to continue believing in archaic fantasies increases. Religion was entirely reasonable 100 years ago. Today, its just not something that an educated person should be able to believe.

[kylok]

Blindly religious folk tend to demonstrate the danger of religion in a very clear way. Your inability to think critically or adequately defend your own arguments is the consequence of your damaged brain twisting reality to fit your fairytale beliefs. Christians don't believe evolutionists have real evidence because their minds can't view anything objectively anymore. As the arguments against theism becomes more clearly and openly articulated, the mental gymnastics required to continue believing in archaic fantasies increases. Religion was entirely reasonable 100 years ago. Today, its just not something that an educated person should be able to believe.

+1 the world needs more of you to balance out the crazy sheepsies. WTB intellectual equilibrium for the human race, offering my "soul" as payment.

[Orruar]

Blindly religious folk tend to demonstrate the danger of religion in a very clear way. Your inability to think critically or adequately defend your own arguments is the consequence of your damaged brain twisting reality to fit your fairytale beliefs. Christians don't believe evolutionists have real evidence because their minds can't view anything objectively anymore. As the arguments against theism becomes more clearly and openly articulated, the mental gymnastics required to continue believing in archaic fantasies increases. Religion was entirely reasonable 100 years ago. Today, its just not something that an educated person should be able to believe.

It's going to be really hilarious how people in about 1000 years view our current culture. Everything from our religions to our political views are going to seem utterly ludicrous and silly.

I'm sure they'll understand how we could be so ignorant, just as we have some understanding how people 1000 years ago could be so ignorant as to believe some man in the sky was responsible for plagues. I mean, they just didn't have any way to know what a virus or bacteria is.

Of course, apparently we have young nurses who still believe this today. I mean, since all life is created by god, then diseases must be attributed to the magical bearded fellow in the sky, yes?

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

It's going to be really hilarious how people in about 1000 years view our current culture. Everything from our religions to our political views are going to seem utterly ludicrous and silly.

I'm sure they'll understand how we could be so ignorant, just as we have some understanding how people 1000 years ago could be so ignorant as to believe some man in the sky was responsible for plagues. I mean, they just didn't have any way to know what a virus or bacteria is.

Of course, apparently we have young nurses who still believe this today. I mean, since all life is created by god, then diseases must be attributed to the magical bearded fellow in the sky, yes?

And here it ends with the "hard" science nerds beating off to each other, praising the other for awesome they are at disproving nothing. The funny thing is that the burden is on you to disprove God. Science works like that. But you cannot. No scientist has ever been able to. So in step with science, you must admit that there is the possibilty that God exist. If you deny that, you are not truly scientist. Opps!

[r00t]

true, even richard dawkins doesnt go full retard atheist

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

And as a side note, can the "Hard" science Gods of RNF please direct me to your published works. I would be interested in reading them. Do you have published works? Or are you just taking some classes? Or maybe you work in the field of science, but you just don't really do much other than spout off crap your teachers told you when you were in school? Just wondering where you fall in the realm of science.

[r00t]

they just mindlessly parrot the bullshit their biology 101 community college professor says

[Lune]

Where we fall in the realm of science is we have enough of a cursory understanding to know that intelligent design is a complete and utter crock of horse shit. You don't need a doctorate to know that.

It is factually wrong, and more and more of it disappears every day. You don't see the "world is 6,000~ years old" claim nearly as much as you used to. That used to be a big one.

[Kagatob]

the burden is on you to disprove God. Science works like that.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

That is not how "science works".

[Gadwen]

they just mindlessly parrot the bullshit their biology 101 community college professor says

I lol'd

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Where we fall in the realm of science is we have enough of a cursory understanding to know that intelligent design is a complete and utter crock of horse shit. You don't need a doctorate to know that.

So you have never been published? Wow, and here I thought you were this hardcore science dude. I feel a little let down now. II am beginning to think r00T is right. You just mindlessly parrot the crap your Community College O Chem adjunct teacher is feeding you. Wow, you sure showed me.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

You don't see the "world is 6,000~ years old" claim nearly as much as you used to. That used to be a big one.

And you don't see the "maggots spontaneously appear from meat left out for days" either. Yep, that was a biggie in the scientific realms.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

That is not how "science works".

Bertrand Russell is philosophy, not science. Are you saying philosophical arguments are based in science?

[Kagatob]

And you don't see the "maggots spontaneously appear from meat left out for days" either. Yep, that was a biggie in the scientific realms.

You fail to recognise that back then there wasnt much of a defined scientific community to begin with. You're grasping for straws and I'm beginning to suspect you may just be another troll.

[Kagatob]

Bertrand Russell is philosophy, not science. Are you saying philosophical arguments are based in science?

Confirmed troll.

[kylok]

My O chem teacher has many published papers as well as a PhD in Physical Chemistry, but I stated this before - and no I'm not going to link who he is on an elf sim forum just take my word for it - ima scientist =D. We'll just say that he is very well respected in his field, and does math in his head faster than I can put it in a calculator. I also said that ima 24 year old chem student - nothing to prove and nothing to hide. Since we're on the topic, did your anatomy class have a lab? Cause if your anatomy class didn't involve you cutting open a cadaver you should really just stfu about the human body. Reading a book about anatomy =/= experience with working with a human body.

[kylok]

Actually now that I think about it every single professor in my chem department has a PhD...

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Confirmed troll.

I love how people become confirmed trolls when others can't argue back. I deem you a confirmed troll as well Kagatob. So now because there wasn't a sufficient "community" back then, the science was never valid? You are only saying that because of how absurd it is today. Is Newton's science not valid anymore due to the lack of a scientific community?

Ok instead of spontaneous generation how about we use the Einstein Static Universe theory? Is this recent enough for you? And for God's sake this is Einstein we are talking about.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

My O chem teacher has many published papers as well as a PhD in Physical Chemistry, but I stated this before - and no I'm not going to link who he is on an elf sim forum just take my word for it - ima scientist =D. We'll just say that he is very well respected in his field, and does math in his head faster than I can put it in a calculator. I also said that ima 24 year old chem student - nothing to prove and nothing to hide. Since we're on the topic, did your anatomy class have a lab? Cause if your anatomy class didn't involve you cutting open a cadaver you should really just stfu about the human body. Reading a book about anatomy =/= experience with working with a human body.

So it sounds like your professor has done a bunch, but what about you? And yes, my anatomy had a lab. It was Gross anatomy. We had three cadavers in the lab. A full cadaver, and two midsaggital cadavers...one male, the other female. We also had brains, eyes, hearts, lungs, and all of the GI tract organs to dissect as well. In nursing, AnP is taken separately.

[DrKvothe]

In grad school, i published 2 papers as a primary author, 4 as a secondary author, 1 as 3rd author, and I wrote a book chapter reviewing developments in my field. Nothing particularly high impact, but the lowest was chembiochem which is still respectable imo. I'm not handing out personal info beyond this, so i guess you're free to believe im lying if you wish.

[Kagatob]

I love how people become confirmed trolls when others can't argue back. I deem you a confirmed troll as well Kagatob. So now because there wasn't a sufficient "community" back then, the science was never valid? You are only saying that because of how absurd it is today. Is Newton's science not valid anymore due to the lack of a scientific community?

Ok instead of spontaneous generation how about we use the Einstein Static Universe theory? Is this recent enough for you? And for God's sake this is Einstein we are talking about.

You are basing everything on your own personal opinions and replacing everything you don't understand with 'God'. Moron or troll, pick one. I'm done with this either way.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

You are basing everything on your own personal opinions and replacing everything you don't understand with 'God'. Moron or troll, pick one. I'm done with this either way.

I thought so. Can't argue back so you discount me with some contrived BS to make yourself feel like you won. Whatever makes you sleep better at night.

What in my last post was personal opinion? The thing about Einstein being disproved? What part did I replace with something about God? Yep, thought so...troll!

[SanityRevoked]

The best troll of this thread is the OP.
Either r00t is masterfully playing a retarded bible thumper, or is literally a waste of grey matter.
I think its the former.

The OP is a lolfest if you're serious, and should seek help.


the sun is 400 times the size of the earth's moon, 400 times further away from earth than the moon, yet they look both proportionally the same size in our sky?

wtf is this?
Are you disbelieving the positions or sizes of these objects?

+10 Forum Quest points, you got people to bite.

Fess up r00t.
You're the biggest Atheist on the forums.

[r00t]

I am a deist

[r00t]

DrKvothe got his Dr title from a cracker jack online clown college

[Lune]

You're just being a deist to piss off all the other nerds

[r00t]

I came to deism through science, well with what little of existence it can actually explain. Design and information isn't random, and it's clear there are patterns in everything.

[Barkingturtle]

The fact that meth amphetamine can cause users to witness patterns and conspiracies is actually an argument against God, not for.

[Orruar]

And here it ends with the "hard" science nerds beating off to each other, praising the other for awesome they are at disproving nothing. The funny thing is that the burden is on you to disprove God. Science works like that. But you cannot. No scientist has ever been able to. So in step with science, you must admit that there is the possibilty that God exist. If you deny that, you are not truly scientist. Opps!

Lol, this guy is really falling apart. Question his unshakable faith in god and suddenly he starts to lose it...

The burden is on you to disprove unicorns, and fairies, and Santa Claus. If you can't, then clearly those things must exist.

I invite you to go back through my posts and show where I said god definitely doesn't exist. You won't find me say that though, because that's not something I believe. I'm atheist in the sense that I don't believe in the Christian fairy tale god that grants you entrance into utopia if you just do what the priest tells you to do. But it would be pretty crazy to say "X doesn't exist" and be certain about it. Can't prove a negative and all. I'm sure you'll get to that kind of basic logic at some point in your education.

But I also don't choose to believe in things for which there is basically zero evidence. I don't arrange my life around the belief of the existence of unicorns. I don't spend my time building special saddles for unicorns and keeping a few bales of hay handy in case one drops by.

[Orruar]

And as a side note, can the "Hard" science Gods of RNF please direct me to your published works. I would be interested in reading them. Do you have published works? Or are you just taking some classes? Or maybe you work in the field of science, but you just don't really do much other than spout off crap your teachers told you when you were in school? Just wondering where you fall in the realm of science.

Yes, fantastic idea. I'll direct you to my published papers so that all the RnF trolls can have all of my personal info. Fucking brilliant, you are.

[Kagatob]

Lol, this guy is really falling apart. Question his unshakable faith in god and suddenly he starts to lose it...

The burden is on you to disprove unicorns, and fairies, and Santa Claus. If you can't, then clearly those things must exist.

I invite you to go back through my posts and show where I said god definitely doesn't exist. You won't find me say that though, because that's not something I believe. I'm atheist in the sense that I don't believe in the Christian fairy tale god that grants you entrance into utopia if you just do what the priest tells you to do. But it would be pretty crazy to say "X doesn't exist" and be certain about it. Can't prove a negative and all. I'm sure you'll get to that kind of basic logic at some point in your education.

But I also don't choose to believe in things for which there is basically zero evidence. I don't arrange my life around the belief of the existence of unicorns. I don't spend my time building special saddles for unicorns and keeping a few bales of hay handy in case one drops by.

He's just another troll man, get used to him. He could easily and logically stop at "I don't believe evolution is necessarily correct but I also don't have a better answer yet" but insists on falling back on sky daddy instead.

[Orruar]

Also, you have now fallen into using the argument from authority about a half dozen times. I wonder if this particular fallacy just more common above those who believe in a higher authority, or if you just don't understand it.

Let me give it one more try: The validity of an idea has no relation to the person who states it. We have logic and reason for the purpose of determining the validity of ideas, because history has shown time and again that judging ideas based upon the person preaching them is a terrible way to determine truth.

[Swish]

http://i.minus.com/i9c9Xlnrzux5W.gif

[kylok]

takes 20 pages to get a gif from swish =(

[kylok]

So it sounds like your professor has done a bunch, but what about you? And yes, my anatomy had a lab. It was Gross anatomy. We had three cadavers in the lab. A full cadaver, and two midsaggital cadavers...one male, the other female. We also had brains, eyes, hearts, lungs, and all of the GI tract organs to dissect as well. In nursing, AnP is taken separately.

You obviously can't read. I'm a 24 year old CHEM STUDENT, still working on my bachelors. Much like you are still going to nursing school.

Decent troll r00t but still only 4/10. Boggwin was the only thing keepin' this shit thread going.

[DrKvothe]

Bioengineering will likely be the defining technology of this century. Red, white, and green biotech are growing exponentially. Evolution is the algorithm of optimization at the heart of these technological fields. Over the last century ~85% of the exponential growth of American per capita GDP can be attributed to scientific and subsequent technological progress. Our understanding of evolution can be expected to play a significant part in the growth to come. This wealth betters all of our lives. What has been religion's contribution? War, discrimination, and the spread of ignorance that inhibits progress.

[kylok]

Dr. Kvothe for president imo. Nothing but well thought out rational statements from this guy. Would, and probably will, read every post of his again.

[Hailto]

Dr. Kvothe for president imo. Nothing but well thought out rational statements from this guy. Would, and probably will, read every post of his again.

This.

Would buy this guy a beer.

[r00t]

DrKvothe got his Dr title from a cracker jack online clown college

[moklianne]

Slim pickins on p99 flame forums if this thread hit 23 pages in a couple of days....

[Orruar]

Slim pickins on p99 flame forums if this thread hit 23 pages in a couple of days....

Between an OP who accounts for probably 30% of the posts and a guy who on page 10 said he was done with this thread and then posted 17 more times, it shouldn't be too surprising.

[mgellan]

Just had to revisit this to wind down the discussion:

"Atheism: The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and nothing magically exploded for no reason creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense."
Let me fix it for you:

Atheism: Lack of belief in a deity.

Why do you insist on conflating a very one dimensional attribute (atheism) with an entire belief system that may or may not be shared by all atheists? And then misrepresent that belief system so grossly? Let's try this definition:

Naturalistic Rationalism: The belief that the universe spontaneously arose from natural processes we generally understand, setting in motion a logically consistent series of events that eventually resulted in self-replicating molecules which over time which has resulted in the development of sentience in one or more species which has the capability of creating ever more refined models of the universe not based on magic, wishful thinking, or blindly ignoring the evidence.

Makes perfect sense. And you don't have to be an atheist to believe it is the most rational way to learn more about our universe.

Regards,
Mg

[r00t]

"spontaneously arose from natural processes we generally understand"

what lol. science dont explain SHIT in that regard, therefore you yourself are talkin about belief

[r00t]

You have faith in science. It's all unprovable. Empty fossil record makes them think we evolved from chimps, some cosmic background waves make them think they know the age of the universe.

[Orruar]

"spontaneously arose from natural processes we generally understand"

what lol. science dont explain SHIT in that regard, therefore you yourself are talkin about belief

Was it science or religion that pushed our understanding of the universe all the way back to just moments after the universe was created? Was it science or religion that made predictions about the existence and details of the cosmic microwave background which we were then able confirm with observation? Exactly what predictions has religion allows us to make with any accuracy? Religion is quite anti-prediction, as God is both omnipotent and unpredictable. So even if it's correct, it's not a world view that improves our lives, beyond some happy feelings of seeing grandma again in the afterlife.

[kylok]

If God exists human beings don't have free will. This is the biggest problem I have with theism.

And the age of the universe is calculated fairly easily with the speed of light and basic trigonometry. The part of this that is generally not understood is what happened between the "big bang" and the oldest part of the universe that we can observe. A lot of people attribute this to the possible unification of the forces (excluding gravity, which I personally don't consider a force but a property of space, i.e. curvature of space time).

It's an interesting topic to contemplate and religion in any form does little to explain this phenomena. Religion, in my experience, serves the purpose to provide a guide for how people should live their lives. Personally I feel that everything human beings need to make decisions is pre-programmed in us when we come into reality, and doesn't need to come from an outside source.

Take it all how you will - that's how I see things.

[Lune]

IF the big bang happened than how come we didnt here it?

science channel 0
God 1

[kylok]

=D because at that moment there was no medium for the sound to travel through. There also wasn't likely sound if the forces were unified.

[Ahldagor]

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p257/gsaus/Awesome.jpg

[r00t]

[QUOTE=kylok;1201439]And the age of the universe is calculated fairly easily with the speed of light and basic trigonometry./QUOTE]

Lol I'd love to see this genius burger equation

AGE = COSINE TIMES C SQUARED

[kylok]

It's not quite that simple, but it's based on a parsec - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsec
which is an easy calculation to make.

Also, this - "Measurements of the cosmic background radiation give the cooling time of the universe since the Big Bang, and measurements of the expansion rate of the universe can be used to calculate its approximate age by extrapolating backwards in time."
Since the universe expands at a more or less constant rate the age of the universe is not too hard to extrapolate.

[Ahldagor]

the age of the universe is dependent upon light that we've detected with our own instruments. it's an arbitrary human thing. besides time is subjective.

[kylok]

the age of the universe is dependent upon light that we've detected with our own instruments. it's an arbitrary human thing. besides time is subjective.

Well.. yes and no. Since light travels at a constant speed we can say that the universe is at least so old if not older. The passage of time is relative, not subjective as it is a dimension of space-time. The measurement of time, much like the measurement of distance is indeed arbitrary but still based on the empirical. A fun fact to ponder is that from the perspective of a photon travel is instantaneous. Relativity is fun =D.

[r00t]

It's not quite that simple, but it's based on a parsec - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsec
which is an easy calculation to make.

Also, this - "Measurements of the cosmic background radiation give the cooling time of the universe since the Big Bang, and measurements of the expansion rate of the universe can be used to calculate its approximate age by extrapolating backwards in time."
Since the universe expands at a more or less constant rate the age of the universe is not too hard to extrapolate.

LOLOL If scientists can tell that the universe is expanding then whats on the outside of it :p

[kylok]

We don't know =P

[Ahldagor]

Well.. yes and no. Since light travels at a constant speed we can say that the universe is at least so old if not older. The passage of time is relative, not subjective as it is a dimension of space-time. The measurement of time, much like the measurement of distance is indeed arbitrary but still based on the empirical. A fun fact to ponder is that from the perspective of a photon travel is instantaneous. Relativity is fun =D.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception

don't hang yourself with time. it didn't exist until a pattern recognition was named and sustained by humans long before we were even eggs in our mother's bellies.

[kylok]

Let's say that you're r00ted to the ground, in the distance you see a mountain. Since you are immobile you have no way of knowing what is on the other side of the mountain.

If the only way you will acknowledge science is for it to explain every tiny facet of everything - that's an unreasonable expectation. That being said I don't really care if you do or don't, this thread has been fun and been a good exercise in at least attempting to explain what I have learned and feel to be true which I find to be valuable. Shit makes sense to me...

[kylok]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_perception

don't hang yourself with time. it didn't exist until a pattern recognition was named and sustained by humans long before we were even eggs in our mother's bellies.

We're talking about two different things

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_measurement

[r00t]

if sciense is so smart what happens after we die

[kylok]

Einstein's classic example of relativity is that 2 hours with a pretty girl feels like 2 minutes. And 2 minutes of.. lets say reading this thread feels like 2 hours. Your perception of the time does not effect its actual passage.

[kylok]

if sciense is so smart what happens after we die

Science doesn't know. There's far more that science doesn't know than it does. This does not discredit what science does explain. I personally don't care what happens after we die.. because I'll be dead.

[Ahldagor]

We're talking about two different things

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_measurement

i now ask: how does someone measure something.

i'm not trying to be an ass, but the whole idea of time existing depends on a perception.


we didn't have time travel novels until the thinking about time changed (for a fun think about kind of thing that's not related to the points)

[DrKvothe]

When you die? We celebrate and velious comes out.

[kylok]

Science doesn't know.

Actually I misspoke here. Science knows that after you die you decompose. What science can't explain is what happens to your consciousness, or even what consciousness is.

[r00t]

Science doesn't know. There's far more that science doesn't know than it does.

[Ahldagor]

tough read but worth it. explores how notions of time shifted from the greeks to renaissance

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41ZZQZJFEGL.jpg

[kylok]

i now ask: how does someone measure something.

i'm not trying to be an ass, but the whole idea of time existing depends on a perception.


we didn't have time travel novels until the thinking about time changed (for a fun think about kind of thing that's not related to the points)

I'm agreeing with you that the measurement is arbitrarily based on the Earths revolution around the Sun. Going back in time is easy, look in a telescope - you're looking back in time. Going forward on the other hand I won't even bother with. Time does exist, in the same way that space exists, without time there would be no reality. Time is that fourth dimension that is part of the medium of reality.

[kylok]

r00t if you have a point, make it. No respectable scientist would claim that we the human race know more than we don't.

[r00t]

explain why 4d algebra (quanternions) has nothing to do with time

[Ahldagor]

because time is subjective

[kylok]

Unless I am mistaken the 4th dimension that is being referred to is time. For shit to move time has to pass. Example - speed can be represented in meters per second, or distance/time. The distance part is where you move through 3d space (vector). The time part is how fast you are moving over a given distance. If time were truly subjective it would be impossible to get a speeding ticket.

[GradnerLives]

explain why 4d algebra (quanternions) has nothing to do with time

Timecube? (http://timecube.com/)