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 500)

Showing posts 9,981 - 10,000 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Mar 11

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10503
Jan 7, 2013
 
But the chump's screen name came from a crappy made for TV movie where Balkie from perfect strangers yells about scampering all the time in an effort to scare people.

No seriously.
Thinking wrote:
Wrong.
The chicken egg came first from a not-quite-a-chicken.
<quoted text>
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10504
Jan 7, 2013
 
Givemeliberty wrote:
For example the Jesus forgives the adulterous woman story doesn't show up in anywhere until the year 1100.<quoted text>
You are right that was not in many early versions. But was in at least one 5th century manuscript.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_wo...

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10505
Jan 7, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
Wrong.
The chicken egg came first from a not-quite-a-chicken.
<quoted text>
An analogy I like is to imagine alternatively putting a penny and a nickel in a pile of coins. At the beginning, you don't have a lot of money in the pile, but eventually, there will be billions of dollars. Which coin made the total go from not a lot of money to a lot of money?

The point is that it is a gradual transition with no firm boundaries because the definition of 'a lot' is vague. Similarly, the transition from non-chicken to chicken was a long, gradual process with no clear boundary between the two. At each stage, there is an alternation between egg and animal, but there is no sharp line to being a chicken.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10506
Jan 7, 2013
 
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
You'll have to put that Bible down first.
At least you've stopped threatening us with eternal torture.
Looks like IANS mockery of your "scary chicken on a stick" works.
I'm sure you'll agree that he makes a good comparison between your ju-ju and that of a tribal witch-doctor.
Put the Bible down?

What should I read in place of it - science mythology about evolution?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10507
Jan 7, 2013
 
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
"How can heaven and hell coexist? How can any sane and loving human being be happy in heaven knowing that millions of people, innocent or not, are being tortured for eternity? This heaven is a place void of empathy, an asylum for psychopaths. How is this heaven good?”~ Anonymous
Thanks for sharing.

We can see why the author is “anonymous”.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10508
Jan 7, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Put the Bible down?
What should I read in place of it - science mythology about evolution?
No. You should probably start with a simple middle-school science text book so that you can understand what science really is (and isn't). Without this foundation you will continue to appear rather foolish anytime to comment on things you so clearly don't yet understand.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10509
Jan 7, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Well lets see he dropped out 40 years ago Started collage around 20 years old. So this 60 year old non educated man who spends his life on threads like this is trying to show off that he blew it and should have stayed in school.
I get it.
The last thing I would ever want to do is to be rude to Hedonist, but I was disappointed in him for accusing you of being quick to judge people in his post 10489. Actually, it sounds like he was doing a bit of judging himself, lol. He should have shot his arrow at me since I first posted about him being a theology drop out. But then, I wasn't “judging him”- I was simply stating what he posted himself sometime ago, and neither were you, since you just elaborated a bit on it.

I was interested to see that he found something easier to understand than theology when he went out into the country to breed horses. And, of course I was pleased to learn that he has now moved “up” to his big high rise in Atlanta, which is as close as he'll ever get to heaven.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10510
Jan 7, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
An analogy I like is to imagine alternatively putting a penny and a nickel in a pile of coins. At the beginning, you don't have a lot of money in the pile, but eventually, there will be billions of dollars. Which coin made the total go from not a lot of money to a lot of money?
The point is that it is a gradual transition with no firm boundaries because the definition of 'a lot' is vague. Similarly, the transition from non-chicken to chicken was a long, gradual process with no clear boundary between the two. At each stage, there is an alternation between egg and animal, but there is no sharp line to being a chicken.
Thanks for sharing those pearls of wisdom.

You know, it wouldn't surprise me if there is some scientific research somewhere showing that chickens evolved from coins.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10511
Jan 7, 2013
 
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You should probably start with a simple middle-school science text book so that you can understand what science really is (and isn't). Without this foundation you will continue to appear rather foolish anytime to comment on things you so clearly don't yet understand.
Well, hellllllooooo, Hedonist.

I just posted about how great you were with breeding horses, lol
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10512
Jan 7, 2013
 
You must be too stupid to understand
Proper punctuation.[sic]
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you back on Pi?
You must be too stupid to understand
A proper explanation.
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10513
Jan 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

More massive titspeak from dick4cm.
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Put the Bible down?
What should I read in place of it - science mythology about evolution?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10514
Jan 7, 2013
 
Why isn't science “self-correcting”?

Unfortunately, science has some major catastrophes.

Will science get better or worse?

The included link from Sage Journals explains.

http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/645.full

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10516
Jan 7, 2013
 
Just how “self-correcting” is science?

Oh, the rate is about 1% to 1.5%, lol.

So the remaining 98% or 99% is unreliable?

I'm afraid so......

http://nanoscale.blogspot.com/2012/12/just-ho...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10517
Jan 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

The included link is more on the 1% of “self-correcting” science!

The author explains why outsiders are so important, since we can't rely of science to find the errors.

http://blog.sethroberts.net/2010/09/06/is-sci...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10518
Jan 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The scientific method is self correcting.
derek4 wrote:
Why isn't science “self-correcting”?
Unfortunately, science has some major catastrophes.
Will science get better or worse?
The included link from Sage Journals explains.
http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/6/645.full
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10519
Jan 7, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The scientific method is self correcting.
derek4 wrote:
Just how “self-correcting” is science?
Oh, the rate is about 1% to 1.5%, lol.
So the remaining 98% or 99% is unreliable?
I'm afraid so......
http://nanoscale.blogspot.com/2012/12/just-ho...
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10521
Jan 7, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

The scientific method is self correcting.
derek4 wrote:
The included link is more on the 1% of “self-correcting” science!
The author explains why outsiders are so important, since we can't rely of science to find the errors.
http://blog.sethroberts.net/2010/09/06/is-sci...
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10522
Jan 7, 2013
 
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You should probably start with a simple middle-school science text book so that you can understand what science really is (and isn't). Without this foundation you will continue to appear rather foolish anytime to comment on things you so clearly don't yet understand.
One of these maybe?

http://amasci.com/miscon/miscon.html

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10523
Jan 7, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
The scientific method is self correcting.
<quoted text>
Right, all 1% of it.

At a whopping 1%, science corrects more of their errors than you do, lol.

The included link is more on the 1% of “self-correcting” science!

The author explains why outsiders are so important, since we can't rely of science to find the errors.

http://blog.sethroberts.net/2010/09/06/is-sci...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10524
Jan 7, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
The scientific method is self correcting.
<quoted text>
Here we go again:

Right, all 1% of it.

At a whopping 1%, science corrects more of their errors than you do, lol.

The included link is more on the 1% of “self-correcting” science!

The author explains why outsiders are so important, since we can't rely of science to find the errors.

http://blog.sethroberts.net/2010/09/06/is-sci...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 9,981 - 10,000 of11,195
|
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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••