Your thoughts!?

[Mojo]

Great cop-out "Well i don't think you're as intelligent as me! I won't play with you!" The truth is, you called religion bollocks, stupid, "a lie", and that's where the problem was.

Why would I want a discussion who completely leaves the point and starts to make us stuff that I said? why would I this has turned into me defending myself against your mis represented comments?

The truth is, you called religion bollocks, stupid, "a lie", and that's where the problem was.

Again where exactly did I say those words in that context.

I'm not even the only one who said, what i did. Jeremiah said it, in a more "intelligent" way, too. Your delivery on issues needs "finetuning", you're rude and very...well..yes, cold.

I don't think he actually read what I said, I think he just read my replies to comments you made and made assumptions based on that. I replied to his post and he is yet to respond again more comments taken out of context.

You're thinking of it STILL that i attacked your original train of thought or reasoning, which i didn't.

Look back, around page 5 or so, and you'll see.

I can see that you completely mis represented by Bollocks comment, you then went on to say that you could not understand how I could call something bollocks but yet still understand it which again you took completely out of context and my replies trying to clarify were taken out of context one of which Jeremiah picked up on and went completely of on a tangent.

The truth is, you called religion bollocks, stupid, "a lie", and that's where the problem was.

I want you to clarify where I said these words an in that context.

I guess as it is the "truth" you should haver no problem.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Could you try to be as "consistent" as you claim to be? And answer to the previous, not something from when back when.

Also, i suggest you take a look back and try to see that you have a bit of a "fingers in ears, lalala" problem.

Basically, you misunderstood my "don't be such a brick" comment as an attack towards your beliefs, then it escalated, and nothing i say will change your mind so we can just drop it.

Accusations, wanting clarification to non-essential things said and spinning your own web ain't really constructive.

 

[Mojo]

Could you try to be as "consistent" as you claim to be? And answer to the previous, not something from when back when.

I missed a post and addressed it when i saw it, deal with it.

Also, i suggest you take a look back and try to see that you have a bit of a "fingers in ears, lalala" problem.

Are my fingers really in my ears are are you just mumbling? it s pretty hard to keep up with you when your throwing stuff in that I never actually said, combing the separate comments into 1 sentence where I allegedly insulted people. On top of that I have other people using things you said I said against me.

At the end of the day I find it very difficult to have a conversation with you you keep changing tack, you change the point you are trying to make from one post to the next and I am really getting bored.

All this stems from one post where I said

"My Conclusion, it's bollocks"

Which for your benefit I will translate into polite mode.

"My Conclusion, it's not worth the paper it's written on"


Big fucking deal.

 

[old.Tohtori]

All this stems from one post where I said

"My Conclusion, it's bollocks"

Which for your benefit I will translate into polite mode.

"My Conclusion, it's not worth the paper it's written on"


Big fucking deal.

Well finally you got the point; you're delivery is inpolite.

That answer wasn't any more so though. Still insulting and stating opinion as fact.

So, if it's a "big f*cking deal", i can assume you don't care, so i can just say "Fine, you're cold and uncaring".

So stop saying you "understand other peoples views" when you don't give a f*ck about them.


Also, if you want proof about you calling religion bollocks, "a lie", or stupid...don't you think it is?

And the spinning of words or twisting truths you so conveniently threw out there, is exactly what you're doing. Except that you're basing it on what YOU see, and making it fact again.

 

[old.Tohtori]

After taking a moment, yes, i can admit that my "coming forth with the point" skills are lacking, i've known this for a while, and am trying to correct it.

this leads often to misunderstandings(as here) and if the other person is adamant in their defense(as here), it will escalate.

Certainly my "please be nicer" comment wasn't meant as such a "big deal", but ofcourse you can see it's not a singular point of fault here.

 

[Case]

Why don`t you 2 just get a room?

 

[Naetha]

I'd get involved with this argument, but Mojo has said everything I would have said. He's obviously well-read, or thoroughly researched his answers (or both) and you can follow his train of logic and reasoning much more than you can with other posters in the thread.

The only thing I have to add is about fossil preservation and geology. People insert God as a reason for the Cambrian explosion because (geologically speaking) it happened very very quickly. Now evolution theory explains how we (as organisms) evolved from slime/bacteria through varying degrees to where we are now. The fossil record is poor up to the Cambrian explosion because the majority of organisms were soft-bodied, and other than in exceptional circumstances, preservation of soft bodied organisms was rare, and when present, generally poor. However, that doesn't mean that they didn't exist before then, in the same way that you can't assume language didn't exist before the first evidence of writing was discovered. To take the leap of (excuse the pun) faith and to put God in as a reason is lazy and lacking in initative. More on the Cambrian explosion here. Well worth a read, regardless of your standpoint on religion vs reason.

 

[Chronictank]

I'd get involved with this argument, but Mojo has said everything I would have said. He's obviously well-read, or thoroughly researched his answers (or both) and you can follow his train of logic and reasoning much more than you can with other posters in the thread.

-snip-

here. Well worth a read, regardless of your standpoint on religion vs reason.

Reading through that article, the basic jist of it is that they have no proof but they are theorising thats how it all started :S
A bit like reading a certain book and theorising an alternative to what happened

Afaik not all religions discount evolution, but do make the distinction between humans and animals as a act of a foreign influence

Think its time to bring up one of your posts if people have things to add

 

[Naetha]

Reading through that article, the basic jist of it is that they have no proof but they are theorising thats how it all started :S

No proof of what exactly? Evolution? I don't get that from reading it.

 

[Chronictank]

No proof of what exactly? Evolution? I don't get that from reading it.

Far as i understand it they dont actually have any proof of pre-cambrian explosion organisms due to the short lifetime of the species, but are using "modern" (in the big scope of things), to theorise what happened before.
So they dont actually know what happened, but are basing their conclusions on modern observations.
Or have i got the wrong end of the stick?

 

[Case]

People like to live in denial, denial that they are just animals. Many people in the world would not be able to face up to the concept that they have to take responsibility for their own actions. It is not god`s will or the design of god it is the nature of all animals to do what is natural to them and humans are proven scientifically and factually to be animals.

If you could show irreputable proof that 100% god does not exist there would always be a percentage of people who would even then refuse to believe you.

Large parts of america are fundamentalist christians hence the issue we're discussing right here and you will find fundamentalists are the most closed minded and unbending in their viewpoint by their very nature.

 

[Chronictank]

People like to live in denial, denial that they are just animals. Many people in the world would not be able to face up to the concept that they have to take responsibility for their own actions. It is not god`s will or the design of god it is the nature of all animals to do what is natural to them and humans are proven scientifically and factually to be animals.

Whole different discussion, as well as ambigious due to the fact that "animals" are defined under different terms depending who you ask

 

[Naetha]

Far as i understand it they dont actually have any proof of pre-cambrian explosion organisms due to the short lifetime of the species, but are using "modern" (in the big scope of things), to theorise what happened before.
So they dont actually know what happened, but are basing their conclusions on modern observations.
Or have i got the wrong end of the stick?

Wrong end of the stick - the Cambrian explosion definitely happened, its just a case of working out where it fits in the greater scheme of things. As time goes on and scientific methods (such as radio-isotope dating) improve, the accuracy gets better and better.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Wrong end of the stick - the Cambrian explosion definitely happened, its just a case of working out where it fits in the greater scheme of things. As time goes on and scientific methods (such as radio-isotope dating) improve, the accuracy gets better and better.

But as it is, and there's no definite proof(and if we take occams razor out), it would be safe to assume that a higher(ufo whatnot) being could have something to do with it, as much as it would be safe to assume there was no outer influence. Right?

 

[Naetha]

Why discount Occam's razor though? That's like discounting logic and reasoning

It all comes down to probability. Anything is in theory possible, it all depends on its probability.

To quote Richard Dawkins:

We cannot, of course, disprove God, just as we can't disprove Thor, fairies, leprechauns and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But, like those other fantasies that we can't disprove, we can say that God is very very improbable.

Apologies for re-editing. To also quote Bertrand Russell:

If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Both of whom get their point across a hell of a lot better than I can.

 

[Gorbachioo]

There is "proof", just not enough to convince you.
If you want to discuss it i suggest you read through, and if you have something to add, bump an old thread

So what proof is there?

And im reading right now, just cant find this proof anywhere in this thread ;C

 

[Marc]

Why cant people just respect others opinions or beliefs? Some people believe in God, some believe the big bang theory and evolution. Thats fine, you shouldnt ram your own opinions down peoples throats though.

 

[crispy]

mih... frigging edit timer

I'll rephrase that.

Maybe there is a god, but until someone proves it, its just another theory of how the world came to be and should not be considered as fact.

Actually its far from a theory, its more in the realm of... belief.

You guys REALLY need to know what you are talking about when you talk about 'scientific theory' and an everyday 'theory'. They are VERY different.

edit:

YouTube - Ken Miller on Intelligent Design

Very interesting speech/slideshow

 

[old.Tohtori]

Why discount Occam's razor though? That's like discounting logic and reasoning

Because if we involve occams razor into this, then it's one big soup of confusion as many of the scientific finds/theories also have the razor against them

 

[DocWolfe]

Why cant people just respect others opinions or beliefs? Some people believe in God, some believe the big bang theory and evolution. Thats fine, you shouldnt ram your own opinions down peoples throats though.

This is a discussion forum, if you don't wish your beliefs to be challenged or discussed don't discuss them!

 

[Olgaline]

YouTube - Ken Miller on Intelligent Design
Very interesting speech/slideshow

great link, cheers
and it really strikes home the point i started out with trying to say: that creationism/ID is a theological theory, and not science.
and should therefore be taught within the bounderies of theology.

 

[dub]

this is most scary thread on fh ever

you can believe what you want , but untill you submit the theory to peer review you got nothing and should be aware that it holds no more value than the common ghost and goblin story.

 

[Chronictank]

So what proof is there?

And im reading right now, just cant find this proof anywhere in this thread ;C

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/off-topic21/209325-you-religious.html

 

[Gorbachioo]

Actually its far from a theory, its more in the realm of... belief.

You guys REALLY need to know what you are talking about when you talk about 'scientific theory' and an everyday 'theory'. They are VERY different.

edit:

YouTube - Ken Miller on Intelligent Design

Very interesting speech/slideshow

I know I know, im just trying to be polite -.-

 

[Gorbachioo]

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/off-topic21/209325-you-religious.html

Accidently posted the following on the other thread aswell ;>

You see things like you want to see them, just like all religious people do.
If the people who wrote the Quran knew all those things that you say they did, THEN WHY DIDNT THEY SAY IT LIKE IT IS? instead of writing that symbolic crap.

Nothing that you have said so far has proven anything.

 

[Gorbachioo]

Why cant people just respect others opinions or beliefs? Some people believe in God, some believe the big bang theory and evolution. Thats fine, you shouldnt ram your own opinions down peoples throats though.

If i believed that i was the new messiah would you respect my belief? ;o
Or if i believed in say.. leprechauns. would you then respect my belief? No, you wouldnt. Even when all of these things have just as much evidence to back them up.

 

[Gorbachioo]

And uh.. while im at it.

Chronic its kinda odd that your the spokesperson for religion here when you clearly dont represent what religion really means in todays world. Sure there is the very large group of people that believe just like you do and dont preach their beliefs to others, and im fine with that. I do think that people like that are very simple minded tho, but i have nothing against them. The problem is, that this grp is very silent. Theres not much that separates them from the atheists.

Its the religious whackos that i dislike so much. So many bad things have happened in the world because of complete bullshit and thats why i cant tolerate unrational thinking like that. When I trash religion i talk about these people, not people like you. Even though i do think that all religion is dumb. That quote that mojo put in earlier was exactly how i think about it, and theres not much you can say to that.

 

[old.Tohtori]

If i believed that i was the new messiah would you respect my belief? ;o
Or if i believed in say.. leprechauns. would you then respect my belief? No, you wouldnt. Even when all of these things have just as much evidence to back them up.

You wouldn't believe how many "religious" people think i'm insane for being a nordic believer

 

[Jeremiah]

If i believed that i was the new messiah would you respect my belief? ;o
Or if i believed in say.. leprechauns. would you then respect my belief? No, you wouldnt. Even when all of these things have just as much evidence to back them up.

Respecting someone's beliefs doesn't mean you need to think they are true, it means you leave them alone to think what they want without flaming them or telling them they are wrong.

And to be honest, you do seem to have a bit of verbal diarrhea just now. Have you actually checked up on the historical evidence and value texts like the Bible has? For example, theres more historical evidence of Jesus walking on the earth than other historical characters such as Alexander the Great? Maybe we discount such evidence because Jesus (and other religious figures) claimed to be sent by God - maybe he was just a mad man, but there's definite evidence that he existed.

 

[Chronictank]

Accidently posted the following on the other thread aswell ;>

You see things like you want to see them, just like all religious people do.
If the people who wrote the Quran knew all those things that you say they did, THEN WHY DIDNT THEY SAY IT LIKE IT IS? instead of writing that symbolic crap.

Nothing that you have said so far has proven anything.

might make sense to keep the is it true? stuff in the other thread, and the whole respecting beliefs thing in this thread

And to answer your above point, Jedi is a officially recognised religion
You are free to make up your own beliefs provided you sufficient support for it