You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Scientists...Got it wrong again!
- Thread starter peilthetraveler
- Start date
Things that religious fanatics/nutcases believe
1. The earth is 6000 years old. Literally. Yes, you heard that right. That's what these weirdos actually believe. Carbon dating? (fingers in ears).
2. Sometime soon, the earth is going to open up and a bunch of fire and brimstone will come down and a goat with 27 eyes will come down and a big lake of fire will appear and if you are one of the 6 billion people on earth who don't believe that a mythical figure was the Son of 'God', you're going to be cast down into the fire to burn for all eternity. You could be the kindest, most generous person in the world, but if you don't accept Jesus Christ into your life, you're doomed. If you point out to them that this sounds like something conceived on an acid trip, they will likely either start crying or speaking in tongues.
3. A gang raped 13-year old girl can't abort a fetus that's a result of the rape because... because... well, it's unclear how these savages can justify such an inestimably cruel edict, but somehow they do.
4. A recent religious nutcase named Carrie Prejean came out and said that although homosexuality is 'immoral', it is perfectly all right to tell young girls that a good course of action would be to surgically mutilate their own bodies in order to make themselves sexually attractive to men. The one thing is immoral, the other is moral. Get it?
5. When the scientific method shows it's working, when a theory is disproved, the religious extremists say 'Here's proof that science doesn't work'. They are too brainwashed to realize that the opposite is true. They can't conceive of actually questioning one's own belief, because after all, what need is there to question anything? God is Lord and Jesus walked on water and sinners are going down for the long sauna. What more did you need to know?
"A connoisseur's sampling at the table of human folly".
(not my own, that was Updike, another famous heathen. I wouldn't expect the religious whackjobs like peil to recognize it. I don't think reading is high on their list of priorities. After all, why read when all knowledge is received?).
1. The earth is 6000 years old. Literally. Yes, you heard that right. That's what these weirdos actually believe. Carbon dating? (fingers in ears).
2. Sometime soon, the earth is going to open up and a bunch of fire and brimstone will come down and a goat with 27 eyes will come down and a big lake of fire will appear and if you are one of the 6 billion people on earth who don't believe that a mythical figure was the Son of 'God', you're going to be cast down into the fire to burn for all eternity. You could be the kindest, most generous person in the world, but if you don't accept Jesus Christ into your life, you're doomed. If you point out to them that this sounds like something conceived on an acid trip, they will likely either start crying or speaking in tongues.
3. A gang raped 13-year old girl can't abort a fetus that's a result of the rape because... because... well, it's unclear how these savages can justify such an inestimably cruel edict, but somehow they do.
4. A recent religious nutcase named Carrie Prejean came out and said that although homosexuality is 'immoral', it is perfectly all right to tell young girls that a good course of action would be to surgically mutilate their own bodies in order to make themselves sexually attractive to men. The one thing is immoral, the other is moral. Get it?
5. When the scientific method shows it's working, when a theory is disproved, the religious extremists say 'Here's proof that science doesn't work'. They are too brainwashed to realize that the opposite is true. They can't conceive of actually questioning one's own belief, because after all, what need is there to question anything? God is Lord and Jesus walked on water and sinners are going down for the long sauna. What more did you need to know?
"A connoisseur's sampling at the table of human folly".
(not my own, that was Updike, another famous heathen. I wouldn't expect the religious whackjobs like peil to recognize it. I don't think reading is high on their list of priorities. After all, why read when all knowledge is received?).
Quote from Cutten:
Name one useful invention, process, or achievement that came from religion - (N.B. I won't count massacres, wars, ethnic cleansing, empire-building, racial prejudice, sexual abuse of children etc).
Plutarch already stated long ago that religion is a function of the state. No state can function without it. Where would their armies come from? Why would a young person sacrifice their lives in a foreign war?
When I say religion I define it as a set of doctrines that "tie together" a group of people.
Without religion there can be no society as we know it. As long as that is understood, and u don't personally fall into it's clutches, religion is a very good thing.
Science, politics, and statecraft are all religious functions.
Science is, well , scientific, not religious. Nor is it a doctrine. Secular politics and statecraft are obviously not religious functions either. The existence of society is not dependent upon religion. Societies clearly evolve, and are primarily occupied with temporal concerns.Quote from ARealGannTrader:
Plutarch already stated long ago that religion is a function of the state. No state can function without it. Where would their armies come from? Why would a young person sacrifice their lives in a foreign war?
When I say religion I define it as a set of doctrines that "tie together" a group of people.
Without religion there can be no society as we know it. As long as that is understood, and u don't personally fall into it's clutches, religion is a very good thing.
Science, politics, and statecraft are all religious functions.
Generally speaking religion is condoned as a process so that large numbers of people can practice their psychosis without having to be being certified insane.
Help me here.
What is an Axiom?
I could be misinformed.
I always thought that it was a reasonable assumption that other observations are based upon.
If the Axiom is wrong, then the theory is wrong, and there are more than a few Axioms that have no proofs.
That is why we have, Theory of this, and Theory of that. It is not proven.
Religions very much deal with temporal things, as in, how to life a (fill in the blank) life.
Statecraft has a lot of faith in it too. The people believe that the state will take care of them. They do all sorts of unreasonable things in a "belief"
Whether or not societies "evolve" is open to debate. Most societies seem to find new ways to do old things. That is adaptation, not evolution.
What is an Axiom?
I could be misinformed.
I always thought that it was a reasonable assumption that other observations are based upon.
If the Axiom is wrong, then the theory is wrong, and there are more than a few Axioms that have no proofs.
That is why we have, Theory of this, and Theory of that. It is not proven.
Religions very much deal with temporal things, as in, how to life a (fill in the blank) life.
Statecraft has a lot of faith in it too. The people believe that the state will take care of them. They do all sorts of unreasonable things in a "belief"
Whether or not societies "evolve" is open to debate. Most societies seem to find new ways to do old things. That is adaptation, not evolution.
Think Ive gotta go along with stu on much of this. Original clans were formed for safety and food purposes. Yes, some did have a religious theme of some sort develop, many did not. Leaders did tend to think of themselves as god-like at times, but that would be another story.
Gravity is science. Visual acuity can be changed by science, by wearing glasses. Does faith and prayer fix ailments? Maybe, not trying to dismiss people's faith, just trying to point out the differences. We don't rely on the State to wake us up or to take care of our health, but I will grant that many do develop a tendency to think they are somehow owed sustenance from the State.
Does science change? It may appear to some, but my feeing is that mankind has simply developed better tools to interpret what is already around us. Theories will be over-turned, no more flat world. Just because we are growing our data base of facts and science, doesn't mean that theories are right or wrong. We just have better ways of proving or disproving them. The 6000 year thing is a pretty radical notion for any scientist to fathom.
c
Gravity is science. Visual acuity can be changed by science, by wearing glasses. Does faith and prayer fix ailments? Maybe, not trying to dismiss people's faith, just trying to point out the differences. We don't rely on the State to wake us up or to take care of our health, but I will grant that many do develop a tendency to think they are somehow owed sustenance from the State.
Does science change? It may appear to some, but my feeing is that mankind has simply developed better tools to interpret what is already around us. Theories will be over-turned, no more flat world. Just because we are growing our data base of facts and science, doesn't mean that theories are right or wrong. We just have better ways of proving or disproving them. The 6000 year thing is a pretty radical notion for any scientist to fathom.
c
I think you'll find an Axiom is a proposition the truth of which is accepted as self-evident. That is somewhat more than just reasonable assumption. An axiom being more of a saying that is generally accepted.Quote from ARealGannTrader:
Help me here.
What is an Axiom?
I could be misinformed.
I always thought that it was a reasonable assumption that other observations are based upon.
If the Axiom is wrong, then the theory is wrong, and there are more than a few Axioms that have no proofs.
That is why we have, Theory of this, and Theory of that. It is not proven.
Religions very much deal with temporal things, as in, how to life a (fill in the blank) life.
Statecraft has a lot of faith in it too. The people believe that the state will take care of them. They do all sorts of unreasonable things in a "belief"
Whether or not societies "evolve" is open to debate. Most societies seem to find new ways to do old things. That is adaptation, not evolution.
I see what you mean but scientific theories have facts or axioms within but are not necessarily proof of something overall. Generally a theory is an idea, however a scientific theory is much closer to proof or fact.
Bottom line..you don't need religion to carry out any idea plan or strategy. In fact religion will not, cannot, has not, as Cutten alludes, provided ANY useful invention, process, or achievement. You do need science to do that.
Religion piggy backs on everything that in society or personally can be thought of or carried out anyway for their own sakes. In that way religion is symbiont, as it needs society, although I think of it more like a parasite.. It is always an added complication that once stripped away , what is being said or done at the core, is all always the more clear.
Quote from SWhiting:
Dadburn it, Eight. Here we've spent almost 200 years, thousands of scientists from all areas of science, working millions of man-hours and spending millions of dollars building the case for evolution and all we had to do was come see you and we'd have a 'simple' explaination. You need to write a paper about this stuff !!
If the scientists were/are 'wrong' they will soon correct their mistake: that is the glory and wonder of science.
Real science, like what I do in my spare time, corrects itself, goes with the evidence, this other shit we call science nowadays is on course like a 757 on autopilot and it does not correct itself, it does not even admit to the possibility that it needs correction other than minor adjustments... it calls people names and gets them fired from jobs for even suggesting that it needs correction... it's no better than the medieval church in that regard... the funny thing is that it is supported by public funding and controls the debate venue. Some have posited that if the evolutionists with all their circular reasoning had to get private funds to support their schools and debate everybody to attract students.. they would be out of business.. I think that might be the case...
Quote from stu:
So you're saying you disregard everything that doesn't fit your world view.
um no, <s>Science</s> You are the one who disregards everything that does not fit your world view.
Projecting your self-proclaimed religious pseudo-scientific shortfalls onto science, does not make science fall short.
Don't bust my nuts.. do your own due diligence.