Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Star Press

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Comments (Page 389)

Showing posts 7,761 - 7,780 of11,219
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8189
Dec 11, 2012
 
Thinking wrote:
god was about as discriminating in that attack as 9/11
If only you knew of a deity that could be more accurate.
<quoted text>
Personally, I feel it would have been nice had God taken you out, but he knows what's best. He allows you your few moments on earth and lets you blaspheme him all you want, then he just roasts you for eternity, lol. The plan is fairly simple – got it? He's in no hurry.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8190
Dec 11, 2012
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
It's called a spoof Dim. You actually took this seriously didn't you?
Holy effing sht.
<quoted text>
Poor, pitiful, and dense little you; whining again.

You and Kitten = repulsives.

Give your worthless opinion to Mr. Newdow, not me.

Tell all the atheist churches they are just spoofs. See how they react, and let me know how that's working out for you.

Tell this one too:

North Texas Church of Free Thought

“Whatever you don't believe, you're not alone”

“The North Texas Church of Freethought is a Fellowship of Unbelievers. We do what all the other churches do, but with one less god. Our aim is to offer atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, and freethinkers all the educational, inspirational, and social and emotional benefits of traditional faith-based churches. We do this by preaching Freethought, a rational approach to religious questions of life, love, meaning, and happiness. Our growing community of freethinkers provides a positive, affirming environment for leading a good life, free of the illogic and intolerance of other religions based on holy books and supernaturalism.

Historian David Fitzgerald, author of Nailed: Ten Christian Myths That Show Jesus Never Existed At All, will be visiting the DFW area later this week. He will speak at SMU this Wednesday night October 10 at the Umpherey Lee building room 241 at 7 pm ($5 donation suggested), Thursday night October 11 at UTA's Bluebonnet Ballroom at 6 pm ($10 for nonstudents), and on Friday October 12 at UTD's Clark Center at 6 pm.”
http://www.churchoffreethought.org/

Atheists say Christians waste their time in church, yet they have meetings announced to the public, and you say they are “spoofs”? LMAO. Let's say you're right (and you're not) what bigger waste of time could there ever be?

YOU ARE THE REAL WASTE OF TIME.......LMAO.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8191
Dec 11, 2012
 
The Lies of Science Writing

“Writing about science poses a fundamental problem right at the outset: You have to lie.

I don't mean lie in the sense of intentionally misleading people. I mean that because math is the language of science, scientists who want to translate their work into popular parlance have to use verbal or pictorial metaphors that are necessarily inexact.

Here is where the art of science writing for the public truly lies. Choosing the proper metaphor can make all the difference between distorting science and providing an appropriate context from which nonscientists can appreciate new scientific findings and put them in perspective.

Not only is a good picture, even a mental one, worth at least a thousand words, but many scientists themselves think in these terms. Albert Einstein was famous for his Gedanken, or thought experiments, which he used to come up with both his Special and General Theories of Relativity long before experiments existed that could test them directly. His popular expositions on these subjects are still delightful and accessible today because they are full of pictures of trains, elevators and clocks.

Though metaphors are useful in trying to understand complicated scientific ideas, they have their pitfalls. Consider the demonstration many physicists use to describe the bending of space by matter: putting a bowling ball on a rubber sheet and watching it produce a deep indentation. This nicely shows how the sun curves space around it and how this affects the motion of other objects moving nearby.

But it's also a scam. The ball bends the rubber sheet and pulls in other objects simply because the whole apparatus is sitting in Earth's gravitational field. This image also gives many people the false impression that when we talk about curved or flat spaces, we are talking about two-dimensional surfaces embedded in a three-dimensional space and not about three-dimensional curved spaces themselves.

Consider another famous scientific metaphor, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins's idea of the "selfish gene." This is a brilliant and simple way to explain that natural selection relies on the self-perpetuation of genes that promote higher rates of survival. But for some critics, it suggests an intentionality that is absent in the process of evolution. Others worry that it implies an immoral world where selfishness wins out.

When used effectively, an apt metaphor can enhance the real purpose in writing about science for the public: provoking interest and a desire to learn more. Good teaching, after all, is really a matter of seduction. You have to tailor your material to win your audience's attention.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8192
Dec 11, 2012
 
How School Science Lies:

http://www.google.com/url...

[Too much there to post, lol. Click the link yourselves, and read it, or scroll on by like all the others you say you scroll past and then specifically try to dispute parts you've obviously read, lol. Don't care what you do, peabrains.....]

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8193
Dec 11, 2012
 
Common Lies Spread By Atheists

When atheists speak they are almost incapable of not telling lies.

If atheists are not intentionally telling lies then this means that they are just so stupid, idiotic, gullible, and ignorant that they foolishly believe anything they hear in the low-life atheist media.

No one really knows why the atheist media intentionally spreads lies.

continued:

The only time you’ll hear positive things about religion is in actual historical documentations and journals, not in the low-life liberal atheist media.

It’s time for me expose many common lies that have been spread by atheists.

Lie: Historians believe that “The Dark Ages” was a terrible time of superstition that held back the growth of science

Truth: Modern historians don’t believe in the “Dark Ages” as portrayed in the liberal atheist media and the “Dark Ages” is what lead up to the scientific revolution.

Lie: During The “Dark Ages” people were killed for doing science

Truth: No one was killed specifically for doing science in the history of the scientific revolution. People were executed for being heretics and for political reasons, but not for doing science.

Lie: The Church prohibited autopsies and dissections

Truth: Church leaders ordered autopsies and they were carried out regularly from at least the 13th Century.

Lie: Most Science is due to the ancient Greeks

Truth: The Greeks never did science, they did pseudoscience and mathematics, the scientific revolution began when people stopped following Greek philosophers.

Lie: During the middle ages the Church taught that the Earth was flat

Truth: The vast majority of medieval Christian scholars believed that the Earth was spherical and round.

Lie: The Church and religion had prevented methodological naturalism and encouraged belief in magic and the “supernatural”

Truth: The Church was the main cause of methodological naturalism

Lie: Religion teaches people not to seek knowledge

Truth: The Church and religion had encouraged reason and to seek knowledge.

Lie: Giordano Bruno was executed for doing science
Lie: Giordano Bruno’s contributions were significant to the scientific revolution

Truth: Giordano Bruno was not executed for doing science and Bruno made no significant contributions that are relevant to the scientific revolution.

Lie: Galileo was the main person who solidified the heliocentric model

Truth: Newton was the one who solidified the heliocentric model, with Galileo’s contributions alone it would be difficult to distinguish geoheliocentric and heliocentric models.

Continued – many more lies within the link:
http://itsnobody.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/com...

[“My suggestion to atheists: Stop doing science, go home and focus on food, water, and shelter since everything that lead up to the scientific revolution would’ve been viewed as philosophical nonsense and a waste of time to you. Who can be as disgusting as an atheist? They’ve always threatened scientific and technological progress from the very beginning.”]
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8194
Dec 11, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Personally, I feel it would have been nice had God taken you out, but he knows what's best. He allows you your few moments on earth and lets you blaspheme him all you want, then he just roasts you for eternity, lol.
Empty threats. Hell is imaginary.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8195
Dec 11, 2012
 
re-posting so the it sinks in, lol:

".. to atheists: Stop doing science, go home and focus on food, water, and shelter since everything that lead up to the scientific revolution would’ve been viewed as philosophical nonsense and a waste of time to you. Who can be as disgusting as an atheist? They’ve always threatened scientific and technological progress from the very beginning."

HAHAHA

...and pick / eat your godless boogers, LMAO!!!!
Thinking

Zeals, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8196
Dec 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Work in progress!
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Congratulations.
Thinking

Zeals, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8197
Dec 11, 2012
 
If your god's good I'll be just fine.

If not, you're f**ked too. He won't need you.
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Personally, I feel it would have been nice had God taken you out, but he knows what's best. He allows you your few moments on earth and lets you blaspheme him all you want, then he just roasts you for eternity, lol. The plan is fairly simple – got it? He's in no hurry.
Thinking

Zeals, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8198
Dec 11, 2012
 
Can you get asbestos worms?
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
...the worms will love you.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8199
Dec 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

MISCONDUCT IN SCIENCE:
DO SCIENTISTS NEED A PROFESSIONAL CODE OF ETHICS?
by: Vincent N. Hamner

“Discussions of misconduct in science have become prevalent in the literature. Fundamental texts regarding this subject have been published in recent years. Many of these case studies are primarily of historical interest. Within the past few decades however, many more instances have come under scrutiny. The ease by which information is exchanged today has allowed for the general public to become increasingly aware of supposedly "isolated instances" of misconduct in science.

A literature search using the key words "SCIENCE & FRAUD" on an INFOTRAC CD-ROM-based data system yielded over two-hundred and thirty citations regarding these topics during the years from 1988 to 1991. Typical citations in the popular literature were available for news-magazines and newspapers such as Time, Newsweek, The New York Times, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and U.S. News & World Report. Commonly cited science related publications included Science, Nature, New Scientist, Science News, Omni, Discover, and The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Business related publications such as Forbes, Fortune Magazine, The Economist, and Business Week were cited as well. It would seem that discussions of "SCIENCE & FRAUD" in contemporary periodicals have become quite fashionable.
http://www.files.chem.vt.edu/chem-ed/ethics/v...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8200
Dec 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Vincent Hamner

Polarimetry, as applied to chemical analysis, deals with the determination of the extent and direction that an optically active chemical species will rotate incident linearly polarized light. Although well developed for physical sensing, the technique of fiber optic polarimetry for chemical sensing remains in its infancy. This thesis is concerned with the design and development of an optical fiber polarimeter which measures the optical rotation of linearly polarized light that occurs in a sensing region between two multi-mode optical fibers. Over short distances, the polarization preserving capabilities of large-core multi-mode optical fibers were investigated. Polarimetric analyses were performed using sucrose and quinine hydrochloride. The instrument has a resolution of O.O8·, and is an excellent platform for an LC or FIA detector. Its more intriguing future lies in evanescent field sensor applications and studies of chiroptical surface interactions.

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/et...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8201
Dec 11, 2012
 
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
Empty threats. Hell is imaginary.
When it gets too hot in hell fer 'ya, put in a request for a drink of water, then take a number and wait your turn.

I got an email awhile ago and it showed that that the last number issued was 4,582,904,456,829,145.

The person being served now is number 204,278.

They are getting a drink of vinegar mixed with Tabasco and ammonia.

LMAO

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8202
Dec 11, 2012
 
But I don't like spam!

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8203
Dec 11, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
But I don't like spam!
Ahhh.

Well, gee, we all have to put up with a few minor irritations. We have lots of spam in this forum - the red devil - for example, I skip all of his or her posts / spam.

And then, we have you for more spam....

But I have good news for you, Poly - I read ALL your posts.

Coming from me, that is a REAL compliment.

Hey, but don't let it go to your godless peabrain, since your posts mean nothing to me - but you shore do hang in there and try, don't ya?
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8204
Dec 11, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
When it gets too hot in hell fer 'ya,
According to your mythology, God gets to decide who gets to heaven or hell.

Do you understand that, you are not a judge of anyone here. "Thou shalt not judge"

I know what you are.. a bat shit crazy fundie. Topix is a magnet for you people.(head slap)

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8205
Dec 11, 2012
 
Which is why the spambot needs to be reported and removed. He actually posts spoof stories and goth chick costume jewelry ads which are trying to be funny but he takes them seriously!

He has to rely on copy and paste spam because he has nothing to say but he lacks the IQ to even properly comprehend his own spam!

It would be one thing if he posted one to three max of this nonsense but instead he gets obnoxious posting and reposting 20-30 spam posts at a time.

Come on gang time to flush this turd already.
polymath257 wrote:
But I don't like spam!
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8206
Dec 11, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
spam
Goodbye turd :)

flush

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8207
Dec 11, 2012
 

Judged:

2

polymath257 wrote:
But I don't like spam!
Sorry, that's what's on the menu, along with

Egg and Spam;
Egg, Bacon and Spam;
Egg, Bacon, sausage and Spam;
Spam, Bacon, sausage and Spam;
Spam, Egg, Spam, Spam, Bacon and Spam;
Spam, Spam, Spam, Egg and Spam;
Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, baked beans, Spam, Spam, Spam and Spam;

AND

Lobster Thermidor aux crevettes with a Mornay sauce, garnished with truffle pâté, brandy and a fried egg on top and Spam
KJV

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8208
Dec 11, 2012
 
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>I would have liked a clearer denunciation of stoning people to death, and perhaps an explanation of why it had been considered moral in the past, but OK - I'll accept that. I will have to update my argument to reflect only things that Jesus DIDN'T correct.

Have you seen Monty Python on stoning for blasphemy? https://www.youtube.com/watch...
I think the point was made on stoning by how Jesus handled it. His answer had he simply said no more stoning would have left questions instead he answered with wisdom.

"Have you seen Monty Python on stoning for blasphemy? "

Yes and loved it.

Also: what else other then wood floats?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 7,761 - 7,780 of11,219
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••