Aliens and evolution

Jun 19, 2012 Full story: Washington Times 6,103

DENTON, Texas, June 19, 2012 - Aliens are ingrained in our cultural psyche. They abound in books, movies, radio, and a thousand theories about the extra-terrestrial, little green men, UFO sightings, abductions, Area 51, and Roswell.

Full Story

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#1760 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>Just because a character is fictional does not mean that they do not have a profession.

Were Romeo and Juliet lovers?
Is Bruce Wayne Batman?
Is Ironman one of the Avengers?

By your standards, the answer to all the above questions would be: "No! You are deluded!"
Romeo and Juliet were characters in a play. They do not exist. They never existed.

Bruce Wayne is a comic book character (fictional) whose alter ego is Batman (also fictional). Neither exist. They never existed.

Ironman is a comic book character (fictional) as are the Avengers. None of them ever existed.

I ask again.

Are you able to function in society or are you a ward of the state?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#1761 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that "god" is not a definable term in any real way.
....
No one in this thread is seriously arguing that ancient peoples had all kinds of different "gods" (well no one except you). BFD. That is deflection and has nothing to do with what we were talking about.

To paraphrase your statement from your reply to Polymath --

In order for something to be possible, you have to be able to assign it SPECIFIC criteria.

Which kinda goes back to the general idea that before we seriously consider whether a "god/deity" could exist or not, we should first prove that there is a possible definition for an entity that could rightly be labeled a "god/deity".

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1762 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a character is fictional does not mean that they do not have a profession.
I personally marvel at how you break new ground in stupidity every single day Nuggin.

*slow claps*

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1763 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem is that "god" is not a definable term in any real way.
Gee whiz, you f*cking think?

All this time its what everyones been hammering at you, you ignoramus.

It's the reason why your claim that "god is possible" is at best retarded.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1764 Aug 23, 2012
Didn't I say that I would oust you Nuggin? Didn't I warn you not to bring it?

*sigh* they never learn.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1765 Aug 23, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
This depends on your definition of distance. if you use the Chebyshev (or max) metric, then the spheres *are* cubes.
I will concede this is a technical point specific to the terminology of metric spaces, however.
http://img1.ak.crunchyroll.com/i/spire3/a47fe...

:-(
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1766 Aug 23, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
Didn't I say that I would oust you Nuggin? Didn't I warn you not to bring it?
*sigh* they never learn.
No, you didn't.

Still waiting for that apology Skippy.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#1767 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>Except that they do. Pharaohs were gods. They actually existed.
I'm sure if we had some cult database we could find a handful of people who are currently alive who also fit the job title.
I would say that you have a unique definition of god.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1768 Aug 23, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
So you think fictional characters exist.
Interesting.
Are you able to function in society or are you a ward of the state?
You are getting confused by the two different points. Perhaps there is an adult there who can help you?

Point 1: Someone/something's rank/profession/title/etc is not dependent on that person/place/thing actually being real. There are COUNTLESS examples of this. I cited several above, you failed to refute them. Would you like to try again?

Point 2: There are people/things which are real, do actually exist, and have been given the rank/title of "god". These include, but are not limited to: Pharaohs, the Sun, a volcano, etc.

So far, your two arguments appear to be:

"If something doesn't exist in reality, it can't possibly be referred to whatsoever. Therefore Bruce Wayne is not Batman."

And

"Egyptian religion is fake because I don't believe in it."

Neither of these is a very solid argument.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1769 Aug 23, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
Bruce Wayne is a comic book character (fictional) whose alter ego is Batman (also fictional). Neither exist. They never existed.
So, when asked "Is Bruce Wayne Batman?" Your response is neither of those things exist.

You must be an awful fun date to the movies.

"Hey! This is BS! That's Christian Bale! Why does everyone keep calling him Bruce?! His name is Christian not Bruce! This documentary sucks!"

And you worry about my ability to function in society. LOL

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1770 Aug 23, 2012
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
No one in this thread is seriously arguing that ancient peoples had all kinds of different "gods" (well no one except you). BFD. That is deflection and has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
Well, actually, both Skippy and Aero are making that exact argument. You aren't, that's fine. They are.
To paraphrase your statement from your reply to Polymath --
In order for something to be possible, you have to be able to assign it SPECIFIC criteria.
If by "paraphrase" you mean completely reverse, then yes.

I didn't say it had to have specific criteria to be possible. I said it had to have specific criteria to be IMPOSSIBLE.

Is it impossible for a person to be blue? Well, not if we haven't assigned specific criteria to the word "blue". Therefore the statement "A person can be blue" is possible until you find criteria which is much more specific.

A person could be blue in tint. A person could be emotionally blue. A person could live in a "blue state".

If you want something to be _IMPOSSIBLE_ you have to be VERY specific.
Which kinda goes back to the general idea that before we seriously consider whether a "god/deity" could exist or not, we should first prove that there is a possible definition for an entity that could rightly be labeled a "god/deity".
And since that can never happen, it's a pointless exercise. You can define "god" in terms with which only you agree. The next person defines it in terms which which only they agree. Neither of you is right or wrong because the term "god" is WIDELY APPLICABLE to thousands of different people/places/thing both real and imaginary.

So long as any ONE of those things is possible, then the statement "It is possible for a god to exist" is valid.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1771 Aug 23, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally marvel at how you break new ground in stupidity every single day Nuggin.
*slow claps*
Care to try and disprove my point? Oh, right, 80 pages in and you've never been able to disprove a single one of my points. Why state now?

Are you HONESTLY telling me that you don't think that people can recognize a fictional character as having a profession.

This is the basis of every movie, TV show, book, campfire story, epic poem, etc.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1772 Aug 23, 2012
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>But the evidence of any form of life at all shows that intelligent life is highly probable in the universe. Planets capable of sustaining life have been found in our galaxy. Our solar system is just one of many. The point is though that we should sort out our own issues as a species before we go looking for other intelligent life form to mess around with. I think that was my point, if any.
Intelligence might not be emergent in other, extraterrestrial life forms simply because it is here on Earth. And a Goldilocks planet may not be as perfect up close as it seems from a distance. If food plants can't grow on them, they are inhabitable for us. There's no QuickiMart around the corner if crops repeatedly fail. Geez, we haven't even found life inside our solar system yet. The supposed habitable planets further out in the galaxy are far enough away that we will never reach them anyway. They're like a carrot dangled.

Personally, I dread the thought that living microbes might be brought back from other worlds. We might not survive an alien plague.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1773 Aug 23, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Gee whiz, you f*cking think?
All this time its what everyones been hammering at you, you ignoramus.
It's the reason why your claim that "god is possible" is at best retarded.
You REALLY don't understand how stupid this statement is, do you?

Your position is that something is impossible until proven otherwise. However, if something was impossible to being with, then it CAN NEVER HAPPEN EVER. EVER. NEVER EVER.

Therefore the criteria you are giving is invalid on its face.

Meanwhile, something can be possible AND still never have occurred nor ever will occur in the entire history of the Universe. Just because it hasn't ever happened and likely never will, doesn't mean that it couldn't happen.

It's never happened that the same person has won the lottery every single drawing in a row for an entire year.

It is unlikely that this will ever happen.

It is NOT impossible.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1774 Aug 23, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
Didn't I say that I would oust you Nuggin? Didn't I warn you not to bring it?
*sigh* they never learn.
You do talk a lot of sh1t, but so far you've failed to make a single point on the entire thread.

Your input, barring the topic of your repeated denials, consists of exactly this:

"If I say something is impossible, it's impossible. Look up burden or proof."

And when asked to explain what you mean, your reply is always:

"If I say something is impossible, it's impossible. Look up burden of proof."

It's obvious to everyone here that you don't understand the word "impossible" and you certainly have no grasp of "burden of proof".

The rest is just you bitching about being held accountable to your earlier statements.

“The Intrepid”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#1775 Aug 23, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Only people that are uneducated about science hold views like this. Essentially your opinions about faith and science stem from willful ignorance.
Please explain what it was about my comment that you thought was uneducated.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1776 Aug 23, 2012
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I would say that you have a unique definition of god.
Wrong.

Since my definition of god can be found here:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/

It is, by definition, NOT unique.

To aid you, I've provided you with a link the definition of the word "unique" as well.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uni...

If you need help, ask a grown up.

Since: Sep 07

Valley Village, CA

#1777 Aug 23, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Please explain what it was about my comment that you thought was uneducated.
You are walking right into a page 4 argument, Nano. Expect to spend the next 80 pages with him calling you a liar and denying any statements he makes.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1778 Aug 23, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Intelligence might not be emergent in other, extraterrestrial life forms simply because it is here on Earth. And a Goldilocks planet may not be as perfect up close as it seems from a distance. If food plants can't grow on them, they are inhabitable for us. There's no QuickiMart around the corner if crops repeatedly fail. Geez, we haven't even found life inside our solar system yet. The supposed habitable planets further out in the galaxy are far enough away that we will never reach them anyway. They're like a carrot dangled.
If intelligent life exists on Earth there's no reason it can't exist elsewhere. It could even be very "near" (by universal standards) and we could still not come close to finding it.

In my personal opinion odds are that it exists somewhere in the universe. I have no evidence of course.

Which means aliens do not exist and are impossible, period.

AIN'T THAT RIGHT, SKIPPY?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1779 Aug 23, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You do talk a lot of sh1t, but so far you've failed to make a single point on the entire thread.
Your input, barring the topic of your repeated denials, consists of exactly this:
"If I say something is impossible, it's impossible. Look up burden or proof."
And when asked to explain what you mean, your reply is always:
"If I say something is impossible, it's impossible. Look up burden of proof."
It's obvious to everyone here that you don't understand the word "impossible" and you certainly have no grasp of "burden of proof".
The rest is just you bitching about being held accountable to your earlier statements.
Boom.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 3 hr ChristineM 5,952
The Perils of Belief 4 hr P_Smith 1
Pastor who gave up God for a year after getting... 4 hr P_Smith 1
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 6 hr Richardfs 233,181
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 6 hr Morse 23,268
Evidence for God! 6 hr Morse 373
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 15 hr RayOne 2,621
More from around the web