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 446)

Showing posts 8,901 - 8,920 of11,175
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9410
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You know, Kitten, today's scientists would call it an alien spacecraft. It's just like fraudulent scientists to jump to that conclusion and come out with false reports. I'm accustomed to seeing that kind of science at work, and people like you supporting it. Too bad we lost old Haeckel – he could draw some space aliens for us, lol.
No, they would call it a UFO until they found out what it was, then they'd call it what it was. So far, no UFO has turned out to be an alien spacecraft. But there are a ton of nut jobs who think that UFOs are aliens spacecrafts, those are the same nuts that thought planets were stars, just different eras.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9411
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

derek4 wrote:
From CBS NEWS, February 11, 2009:
Poll: Majority Reject Evolution
Most Americans do not accept the theory of evolution. Instead, 51 percent of Americans say God created humans in their present form, and another three in 10 say that while humans evolved, God guided the process. Just 15 percent say humans evolved, and that God was not involved.
These views are similar to what they were in November 2004 shortly after the presidential election.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965223...
Oh look, an appeal to popularity fallacy, that's a new one ...*breaks out in wailing laughter*

Sorry, I just couldn't keep a straight face on that. This would be like saying that the Earth is flat 2000 years ago just because most people didn't know any different.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9412
Dec 27, 2012
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
The lies are all yours.
Would you like to tell us what is “creationist” about fraudulent science?
Scientists who do fraudulent work would be fraudulent with or without creationism.
I just post news stories you hate because they work toward discrediting your science god, who has failed you.
As to your next post, get it through your head that I do not want your respect. It's worthless.
It is foolish for you to presume that we Atheists do not look at "science" with the same skeptical eye we cast at religion. I, personally, am skeptical about just about everything! As a reasonably well-read scientific lay-person, I scan the 'bubble-gum' condensed versions of science news, going "ah so" to some and tossing out others that are too far out there. Nothing becomes dogma, nothing is set in stone. I really don't think there's such a thing as "scientific dogma" anymore ... the Universe at the levels we can scrutinize her now, is simply too weird.

That's my opinion anyway. Yeah, the scientific establishment, while founded on the "Scientific method", is a human institution and therefore flawed. We aficionados don't see the battle to maintain grants or the pressure to publish that can corrupt the process ... but, we know it's there. It should not be ignored. If that is your primary message ... we got it. Thanks. We're ready to move on now. See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya! Even flawed, science remains a diamond and religion remains a turd. It's really that simple.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9413
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

RHill wrote:
<quoted text>It is foolish for you to presume that we Atheists do not look at "science" with the same skeptical eye we cast at religion. I, personally, am skeptical about just about everything! As a reasonably well-read scientific lay-person, I scan the 'bubble-gum' condensed versions of science news, going "ah so" to some and tossing out others that are too far out there. Nothing becomes dogma, nothing is set in stone. I really don't think there's such a thing as "scientific dogma" anymore ... the Universe at the levels we can scrutinize her now, is simply too weird.

That's my opinion anyway. Yeah, the scientific establishment, while founded on the "Scientific method", is a human institution and therefore flawed. We aficionados don't see the battle to maintain grants or the pressure to publish that can corrupt the process ... but, we know it's there. It should not be ignored. If that is your primary message ... we got it. Thanks. We're ready to move on now. See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya! Even flawed, science remains a diamond and religion remains a turd. It's really that simple.
Well said.

I'm constantly astounded by Derek's blatant hypocrisy as he uses the technology produced by science to post his spam in his vain attempts to discredit the very science that enables him to display his willful ignorance.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9414
Dec 27, 2012
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they would call it a UFO until they found out what it was, then they'd call it what it was. So far, no UFO has turned out to be an alien spacecraft. But there are a ton of nut jobs who think that UFOs are aliens spacecrafts, those are the same nuts that thought planets were stars, just different eras.
I was quite the UFO-Nut in my teenage years. It fit in well with my Sci-Fi addiction. I got into photography (back in the darkroom days) and learned how "easy" it is to fake pictures (it's far easier now). I got "into" real science and learned how BIG the Universe is and how hard it would be to get here ... my interest in UFO's waned. No one, not even aliens, would go that far just to play 'hide-and-seek' with the local wildlife. LOL

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9415
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Well said.
I'm constantly astounded by Derek's blatant hypocrisy as he uses the technology produced by science to post his spam in his vain attempts to discredit the very science that enables him to display his willful ignorance.
Derek and KJV make me fearful for the future. Such willful ignorance does not bode well for us at all.

And ... thank you for your kind words. I have come to respect your opinions and admire your wit!! By any means ... keep up the good work!!!

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9416
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

RHill wrote:
<quoted text>Derek and KJV make me fearful for the future. Such willful ignorance does not bode well for us at all.

And ... thank you for your kind words. I have come to respect your opinions and admire your wit!! By any means ... keep up the good work!!!
High praise, indeed.

Thank you very much.

I thoroughly enjoy your posts as well. You often say what I'm to lazy to deal with.

:)

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9417
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Is this actually something you are proud of?
That the ONLY country on the planet more willfully ignorant than the US is Turkey is something to be proud of?!
Do you realize that the vast majority of the rest of the world, believers included, laughs AT you, not with you?
I'd really love to know what your family and educational background is.
From CBS NEWS, February 11, 2009:

Poll: Majority Reject Evolution

Most Americans do not accept the theory of evolution. Instead, 51 percent of Americans say God created humans in their present form, and another three in 10 say that while humans evolved, God guided the process. Just 15 percent say humans evolved, and that God was not involved.

These views are similar to what they were in November 2004 shortly after the presidential election.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965223...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9418
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to post 10 years of pedophile priests.
Be my guest. I have no objection to such posts.

It's no reflection on the Bible to show the failures of mankind. The Bible itself records many accounts of it.

I should think you would want fraudulent science to be exposed for what it is. Do you support fraudulent science?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9419
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
No, they would call it a UFO until they found out what it was, then they'd call it what it was. So far, no UFO has turned out to be an alien spacecraft. But there are a ton of nut jobs who think that UFOs are aliens spacecrafts, those are the same nuts that thought planets were stars, just different eras.
In other words, after all these years, science hasn't been smart enough to figure out what the Bible already knew 2000 years ago. Thank you for admitting it.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9420
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
It is foolish for you to presume that we Atheists do not look at "science" with the same skeptical eye we cast at religion. I, personally, am skeptical about just about everything! As a reasonably well-read scientific lay-person, I scan the 'bubble-gum' condensed versions of science news, going "ah so" to some and tossing out others that are too far out there. Nothing becomes dogma, nothing is set in stone. I really don't think there's such a thing as "scientific dogma" anymore ... the Universe at the levels we can scrutinize her now, is simply too weird.
That's my opinion anyway. Yeah, the scientific establishment, while founded on the "Scientific method", is a human institution and therefore flawed.
I agree with you for being skeptical of science.

As you wisely point out to us, Darwin's theory isn't set in stone.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9421
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Derek and KJV make me fearful for the future.

And ... thank you for your kind words. I have come to respect your opinions and admire your wit!! By any means ... keep up the good work!!!
(1) You should be fearful about your future, so we are accomplishing something.

(2) As for the poster to whom you replied - his "good work" cannot be kept up until it begins.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9424
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>Be my guest. I have no objection to such posts.

It's no reflection on the Bible to show the failures of mankind. The Bible itself records many accounts of it.

I should think you would want fraudulent science to be exposed for what it is. Do you support fraudulent science?
Ever watch Dark Matters.

It's on the Science Channel, so I doubt you do, but that's exactly what it's about.

I'm well aware of science's frauds and failures. I'm not afraid to acknowledge them because science's successes far outweigh them.

Can you say the same about your religion?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9426
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Fraud In Breast Cancer Study

Doctor Lied On Data For Decade

“Federal investigators have documented more than a decade of fraud in some of the most important breast cancer research ever conducted, including a landmark 1985 study that established the relative safety of the operation known as lumpectomy and made it a common surgical procedure.”
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1994-03-13...

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9428
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
Ever watch Dark Matters.
It's on the Science Channel, so I doubt you do, but that's exactly what it's about.
I'm well aware of science's frauds and failures. I'm not afraid to acknowledge them because science's successes far outweigh them.
Can you say the same about your religion?
You wrote: "I'm well aware of science's frauds and failures. I'm not afraid to acknowledge them because science's successes far outweigh them." - Since you're not afraid to aknowledge them, then you should have no objection to my posts about them.

You asked, "Can you say the same about your religion?" -- I would never say the same about ANYTHING as you say. I have no use for you.

I don't have "my religion". I believe in the God of the Bible. That belief has nothing to do with science or science fraud, and has never been proven untrue.

You have never proved evolution. Nor has anyone else.

I would never say the same as what you say about anything.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9429
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sorry, batty - I included this statement twice in previous post: "I would never say the same as what you say about anything." - but not really sorry either - LOL

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9431
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

re-posting:

[“The evolution of the eye is a matter of debate ever since Darwin's Origin of Species.”]

From ncbi nlm nih gov:

Evolution of eyes and photoreceptor cell types.
Arendt D.
European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Developmental Biology Programme, Heidelberg, Germany.
“The evolution of the eye is a matter of debate ever since Darwin's Origin of Species.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14756332
[Even though there are sources that make it appear settled and neatly resolved, it remains a matter of debate.]

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9434
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
I was quite the UFO-Nut in my teenage years. It fit in well with my Sci-Fi addiction. I got into photography (back in the darkroom days) and learned how "easy" it is to fake pictures (it's far easier now). I got "into" real science and learned how BIG the Universe is and how hard it would be to get here ... my interest in UFO's waned. No one, not even aliens, would go that far just to play 'hide-and-seek' with the local wildlife. LOL
It is telling that the incidents of UFO sightings is inversely proportional to the availability of camera phones.

(This is also true of "miracles")

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9436
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>This subject scares you because you are a massive tit.
What's wrong with massive tits?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9437
Dec 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You think Cannibalism is ok if the majority of the tribe says it's ok.
"Do you believe that “enjoyment, love and fun” is all there is to life? If so, why should a child molester be denied “his enjoyment and fun” even if it is at the expense of others? If morals are in fact subjective, who are you to tell him that he is wrong given the “subjective standard” he has adopted?
Do you believe that man evolved? If so, is it not true that man also evolved a mechanism to kill his enemies, to spread his sexual seed via rape (which happens in the animal kingdom), to abide by natural selection? If so, is rape truly wrong seeing that it is just insuring the propagation of the human race AND BY WHAT STANDARD IS IT WRONG? Was Hitler truly wrong by killing 6 million Jews that he deemed to be slowing down the progression of the evolution of the human race? After all, these are tools of natural selection, are they not? Also, spontaneous generation has been disproven, so how do you account for non-life begetting life?
If man did in fact evolve, and there is nothing outside of the material universe, then there cannot be free will and free choice, can there? Meaning, if the material universe is all there is, then there is no such thing as an immaterial object; hence there can be no such thing as a law of thought, logic and morality. The result of this is that you do not have free will; you do not think freely; the reasons that you are stating this very thing is because your brain chemicals are forcing you to say such a thing. Why should I trust your brain chemicals over my brain chemicals? Why do you believe what you are stating if you cannot help what you are stating because it is simply an electro-chemical reaction? This once again leads us to ask the question; is truly wrong for a child molester to prey upon his victims? If so, what standard are you appealing to? My standard is the Bible, the very words of God Himself. My standard is “a priori”(apart form self) and objective. What is yours?"
My standard is based on non-belief. My ethics and morals are based on verifiable common interests, known causes and known consequences.

You stick to your unproveable supernatural being and carry on defending genocide and infanticide. Carry on approving of the murder of homosexuals, as well as anyone else who wishes to exercise religious freedom.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 8,901 - 8,920 of11,175
|
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.

•••
•••