Warning: Do Not Click If You Have Religious Views You Do Not Want Challenged

[Guest gnappies]

A little aside here.

One of our soldiers returning from Afghan, was asked when in battle, did he look to god and pray for his safety. He said "No, I look up and think, where's that fxxxing airstrike", "God doesn't do close air support, but the US and RAF do fortunatly".

[Alexandra]

Ok stop with the generalization theres a serious misunderstanding between a correlation and causation the majority of modern and even ancient religions had no causation for the deniel of science or learning and while there are execptions even today, which unfortunately are the ones most talked about, most religions support the pursute of better understanding case in point any sane person would not argue that the sun a gaint ball of gas, made up of hydrogen and helium and nuclear fusion in its core, because scientic studys have proven that a fact however there is no proof for or against that some other being does not influence the unbeleivebly delicate blance the sun or any star maintains through out its entire life.

Also there are new forms of energy we've yet to find its called dark energy and it makes up most of our universe but scientist don't know what it is.

finaly lets all remeber that despite all of our scientific advances compred to what we don't know we still know nothing

[Diapered Jason]

Anyway. There is a law or theory out there that goes something like this. Energy can neither be created or destroyed....it just changes form. Sooo....what if....I told you there'd be a 'what if'....what if we haven't discovered every form of energy yet? Today the Law of the Conservation of Energy remains true and fundamental...however....what IF there are new and exciting forms of energy that we have yet to discover?

Where have you been. There is something called a nuclear fission reaction. Even in E=MC^2 where we change mass into energy, there is still technically a conservation of mass and energy because there is a latent energy in the nucleus of every atom just like there is a latent energy in each bond between an atom. Just saying so far we have learned to harness the power of the atom. What is next? sub-atomic particles?

[belinda_sue_fox]

Also there are new forms of energy we've yet to find its called dark energy and it makes up most of our universe but scientist don't know what it is.

Or there is a seriously big hickup somewhere in the "known" laws.

[Leilin]

Or there is a seriously big hickup somewhere in the "known" laws.

If there wasn't, I think they'd just be called "the laws."

[belinda_sue_fox]

Judge Dread would know!!!!

[wetman]

Judge Dread would know!!!!

That's 'Dredd', Suzie.

[wetman]

Ok stop with the generalization theres a serious misunderstanding between a correlation and causation the majority of modern and even ancient religions had no causation for the deniel of science or learning and while there are execptions even today, which unfortunately are the ones most talked about, most religions support the pursute of better understanding case in point any sane person would not argue that the sun a gaint ball of gas, made up of hydrogen and helium and nuclear fusion in its core, because scientic studys have proven that a fact however there is no proof for or against that some other being does not influence the unbeleivebly delicate blance the sun or any star maintains through out its entire life.

Also there are new forms of energy we've yet to find its called dark energy and it makes up most of our universe but scientist don't know what it is.

finaly lets all remeber that despite all of our scientific advances compred to what we don't know we still know nothing

Occam's razor, Russel's teapot.

Oh, and dear Alexandra, in the name of efficiency, please take a moment to go over your punctuation before you post. Just 1 minute of your time will help to save 5 minutes per reader in fiddling out where your sentences start and, if they do end, end. I want to enjoy the meaning of your posts, not the challenge.

[KittenAB]

Ok stop with the generalization theres a serious misunderstanding between a correlation and causation the majority of modern and even ancient religions had no causation for the deniel of science or learning and while there are execptions even today, which unfortunately are the ones most talked about, most religions support the pursute of better understanding case in point any sane person would not argue that the sun a gaint ball of gas, made up of hydrogen and helium and nuclear fusion in its core, because scientic studys have proven that a fact however there is no proof for or against that some other being does not influence the unbeleivebly delicate blance the sun or any star maintains through out its entire life.

Also there are new forms of energy we've yet to find its called dark energy and it makes up most of our universe but scientist don't know what it is.

finaly lets all remeber that despite all of our scientific advances compred to what we don't know we still know nothing

Erm ... dark matter was tossed out as a fanciful dream by scientists are is just a fluff piece for rags to pull out when they have nothing else to publish. Your other errors have been shown by other posts so I will not repeat those here.

However, modern religions are pushing to have their myths replace science in science class, and if you listen to the preachers ... yeah, they are saying "don't learn anything, just ask us for the answers" all the time.

Oh, and there is no "delicate balance of stars" ... stars are anything but delicate. Any sane person would learn chemistry, nuclear physics, and physics in general before even attempting to explain what goes on in a star ... which only requires high school level education in all those subjects to figure it out.

[wetman]

Christmas trees pre-date Christianity when they were a sign over evergreen winter rites. Same as Christmas day is a pagan festival. The church used these dates to try and persuade the local populace, who were mostly pagan, to become Christian.

...

Right now they are uncertain of this point, it is possible that the Christmas holiday was made up of even more traditions prior to that and the christian religion at that time had their own holiday and eventually they all just combined into one out of necessity. Remember the reason for it being in winter was primarily because there was not much to do in the winter months in Europe back then. But meh, I may not know enough about the historical details to make that assumption, just food for thought. Basically, it may have been a secular holiday from the start though.

As far as I seem to recall it was the Romans that did it. They allegedly had a general policy not to replace religions found in conquered areas, but to incorporate them into the roman way of belief. Since Christianity was accepted in Rome, the pagan winter solstice (= new year) was close enough to the then believed birthdate of Yeshua ben Yussuf*. It stuck, I think.

Ah, the tree thing, nearly forgot that. I was just picking up diaperboykcmo on his, from my point of view silly, from his point of view logical, proof of middle eastern fir tree population density. Oh, my.

And to cookiemonsterbaby: You sinner better leave the cookies and the diapers (the diapers anyway, because such is an abomination to your lord) alone, it's lent!

*Or Jesus Christus**, if you like. But Yeshua ben Yussuf is probably more authentic, if he ever lived. I don't think (assuming that he did) that he was the son, offspring or whatever of any god or such; all that is fan fiction and/ or hype. If the guy existed, he was probably someone who tried to tell the people to be, just for a change, nice to each other, and that this old 'eye for an eye' stuff from the Torah doesn't lead to anything but grief. Some people liked it, and the story got bigger until one or the other politician thought that it'd be a good thing to tie in with that and spread a bit of bullshit to the hoi polloi and tell them to do what they're told. Corrupted the whole thing about being just nice and froody. Maybe. Or not.

**Stage name.

[Alexandra]

Occam's razor, Russel's teapot.

Oh, and dear Alexandra, in the name of efficiency, please take a moment to go over your punctuation before you post. Just 1 minute of your time will help to save 5 minutes per reader in fiddling out where your sentences start and, if they do end, end. I want to enjoy the meaning of your posts, not the challenge.

ok I do proof read I have learning disablity when it comes to editing so sorry for the punction mistakes but I do give a moment to reread my post

[wetman]

OK, accepted. Now take a moment to look up the razor and the teapot.

[Alexandra]

Erm ... dark matter was tossed out as a fanciful dream by scientists are is just a fluff piece for rags to pull out when they have nothing else to publish. Your other errors have been shown by other posts so I will not repeat those here.

However, modern religions are pushing to have their myths replace science in science class, and if you listen to the preachers ... yeah, they are saying "don't learn anything, just ask us for the answers" all the time.

Oh, and there is no "delicate balance of stars" ... stars are anything but delicate. Any sane person would learn chemistry, nuclear physics, and physics in general before even attempting to explain what goes on in a star ... which only requires high school level education in all those subjects to figure it out.

first of all I said dark energy thats differnt than dark matter and further more dark matter is still a vaild concept well accepted read a book on astronomy if you don't believe me, also I've sat through a few church sermons for friends and I've never once heard an attack on science. And how are stars not in a delicate balnce if the hydro staic equialibrium is not in perfect alignment or if the nuclear fusion is off then stars would die or not even make it to birth from proto-stars. I'm done I've tried to justify my point to no avial so go ahead and troll religion I'm done trying to defend it here cause I'm just getting angry and annoyed and thats never a good mind set to have on a forum like this so this is my last post here.

[Alexandra]

I'm not claiming anything aside from the fact that people know nothing in the grand scheme of things and I need only point out the scope of the universe we've never seen to prove that the rest is just my point that having any set frame of mind is bad on either side now I'm done

[Diapered Jason]

And to cookiemonsterbaby: You sinner better leave the cookies and the diapers (the diapers anyway, because such is an abomination to your lord) alone, it's lent!

I like what Stephen Colbert did for lent last year. He gave up Catholicism, lol.

[drynot]

I'm not claiming anything aside from the fact that people know nothing in the grand scheme of things and I need only point out the scope of the universe we've never seen to prove that the rest is just my point that having any set frame of mind is bad on either side now I'm done

And that is what it all really comes down to. Having a 'made up' mind on any subject can be inherently dangerous because you're closed off to so many more possibilities.

The problem with most 'intellectuals'...and I use the term loosely here, is that they don't want to be seen as inferior in what they see as their peer groups eyes. Kitten, and others, have been happy to mock folks who have an inkling towards the spiritual realm. They keep trying to berate these individuals and beat them down with so called 'facts' and 'figures'. While these concepts might indeed be true and accurate, the tone in which it is delivered often produces nothing but animosity and conflict. Once that happens then open and honest debate about the subject becomes near impossible. Which is unfortunate.....

[Diapered Jason]

And that is what it all really comes down to. Having a 'made up' mind on any subject can be inherently dangerous because you're closed off to so many more possibilities.

The problem with most 'intellectuals'...and I use the term loosely here, is that they don't want to be seen as inferior in what they see as their peer groups eyes. Kitten, and others, have been happy to mock folks who have an inkling towards the spiritual realm. They keep trying to berate these individuals and beat them down with so called 'facts' and 'figures'. While these concepts might indeed be true and accurate, the tone in which it is delivered often produces nothing but animosity and conflict. Once that happens then open and honest debate about the subject becomes near impossible. Which is unfortunate.....

I know what you guys are saying, but the issue is science does not really have an answer to these questions you desperately want answered, which is what I said in the first place. What I said in a previous post is we should not assume the answers to the questions, lest we become doctrinaire. I am not going to lie, some scientists do become attached to their theories including a Nobel prize winner of chemistry that I know of. His theory on a related subject was proven wrong, but he disagreed and continues to chase his theory despite now the rest of the scientific community making their own discoveries that contradict his theories. You can't become attached to theories in science, which is why you have to change it when shown new evidence or get put out to pasture. The Big Bang theory is especially modified frequently. In our quotidian research, when a new publication comes out such as a new record for solar cell efficiency, other research groups rush to test this new discovery. Then, we see if we can do better. The beauty of science is you do not have to believe the textbook. You can test it yourself. You can discover it all yourself, which is why most science classes in school have laboratory work.

Also, I have mocked religious people's beliefs only here on this thread, because there is a 99.9% probability they are wrong and yet they believe it so strongly they think it is true. The spiritual realm? I have no knowledge of the sort.

[KittenAB]

I know what you guys are saying, but the issue is science does not really have an answer to these questions you desperately want answered, which is what I said in the first place. What I said in a previous post is we should not assume the answers to the questions, lest we become doctrinaire. I am not going to lie, some scientists do become attached to their theories including a Nobel prize winner of chemistry that I know of. His theory on a related subject was proven wrong, but he disagreed and continues to chase his theory despite now the rest of the scientific community making their own discoveries that contradict his theories. You can't become attached to theories in science, which is why you have to change it when shown new evidence or get put out to pasture. The Big Bang theory is especially modified frequently. In our quotidian research, when a new publication comes out such as a new record for solar cell efficiency, other research groups rush to test this new discovery. Then, we see if we can do better. The beauty of science is you do not have to believe the textbook. You can test it yourself. You can discover it all yourself, which is why most science classes in school have laboratory work.

Also, I have mocked religious people's beliefs only here on this thread, because there is a 99.9% probability they are wrong and yet they believe it so strongly they think it is true. The spiritual realm? I have no knowledge of the sort.

What questions do you "desperately want answered"? How will those questions help improve your life? How is any unanswerable question improving your life?

[JBonn]

A bit late to the topic for a while, but thought I'd chime in on one of the glaring points here.

BS Christmas Tree is a symbol of Religion. Christmas Tree. CHRIST. You can believe what you want, but you can't LIE about the truth!

Really? You think the Xmas tree is a Christian symbol? C'mon, that's a pretty easy one to debunk. Here are some keywords you can use in your search: pagan, winter solstice, evergreens, renewal, druids, celts, sun god, etc. Afaik, the church finally endorsed/co-opted (er... adopted?) the symbol in the 1800s, like they have so many others since it was already popular and therefore useful to support their own mythology.

Oh, and totally (or nearly) off-topic, I just got my "I have a personal relationship with reality" t-shirt in the mail today! Woot!

[KittenAB]

A bit late to the topic for a while, but thought I'd chime in on one of the glaring points here.

Really? You think the Xmas tree is a Christian symbol? C'mon, that's a pretty easy one to debunk. Here are some keywords you can use in your search: pagan, winter solstice, evergreens, renewal, druids, celts, sun god, etc. Afaik, the church finally endorsed/co-opted (er... adopted?) the symbol in the 1800s, like they have so many others since it was already popular and therefore useful to support their own mythology.

Oh, and totally (or nearly) off-topic, I just got my "I have a personal relationship with reality" t-shirt in the mail today! Woot!

Far from off topic, I love those kinds of messages, personally. If I wore teeshirts I'd have a bunch as well, mostly Asimov quotes or Lovecraft ones. How can we hope to comprehend the supernatural before understanding the natural (reality)?

[Guest diaperboykcmo]

It's called a Christmas tree! We put it up for Christmas, which is Jesus birthday!

[Leilin]

It's called a Christmas tree! We put it up for Christmas, which is Jesus birthday!

Firstly, it was around before Christmas was celebrated. Secondly, Jesus wasn't born on the Winter Solstice, but actually in the Fall (late September-October).

[ForbiddenFruit]

Far from off topic, I love those kinds of messages, personally. If I wore teeshirts I'd have a bunch as well, mostly Asimov quotes or Lovecraft ones. How can we hope to comprehend the supernatural before understanding the natural (reality)?

...such as? I'll vouch for 'Adulthood is hell'

[KittenAB]

...such as? I'll vouch for 'Adulthood is hell'

I know more actual quotes from Asimov, I will admit, since I read only Lovecraft stories it would have to be quotes from there.

"So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe." - Nightfall, Asimov

That one is perhaps my favorite.

[wetman]

Sorry to differ, but it just has to be: 'Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn'.