Question My Beliefs, But Be Prepared To Answer For Yours :)

[Luger187]

Boggles my mind sometimes. I asked a very closed minded friend once why we can see the moon & why it shines @ night.. His reply was "because it's a star". from that point on, I realized everyone is not equal.

even someone 1000 years ago would facepalm at that lol

 

[Padawanbater2]

lol, see, stuff like that is funny but deep down, it's very sad.. How much knowledge does it honestly take to disprove that theory? What's that tell you about the amount of thought put into it? I wish creationists could see this. When they say things about the theory of evolution that has already been addressed a million times before, or having a basic, high school level education could debunk, it just shows everybody else who does understand it (not to mention most of us that get it are also actively involved in the creationist/science debate) where they're at on a scientific level of understanding. When someone says to me they don't accept the theory of evolution, I automatically think they must not have given it enough thought, this stuff seems so completely obvious to me in so many ways, there is no other logical reason. Then, as most of you know, as the story goes, that person who denies it proves my point in the pages that follow...

Show me a smart, rational, logical person who denies the theory of evolution. I'll send some +rep your way.

 

[olylifter420]

if those strange fish exist in at the deepest depths humans have been at, why is it not possible that big foot or that other thing dont are not out there?

yeah i would think so. unless they bury their dead!

i also think the loch ness monster is crazy too. theres a lot of people that have supposedly seen it, and the myth goes back in history for a long time. i think i remember hearing there are caves underwater in that loch. not sure if its true. that body of water is huge too. that would be crazy if it really did exist, just like bigfoot. somehow theyve been hiding all this time lol

 

[Apathy One x]

Didn't read this whole thread but here goes, Science likes theory, theory is not the same as fact, for the record, and theory's in Science are only good until a better one is thought up. Evolution I would consider more fact than theory, simply because we can see it happening even today. Hell we an see it happening on this very forum, look at how they breed strains. However that don't mean there could not have been a creator, just not a creator that fits into the description, most people find comforting. Time is relative, right? Meaning that depending on certain factors it could be faster or slower. So Why does a day to us have to be the same time as a day to God? If God could travel 1000 x the speed of light, that would mean 1 day could be a zillion years (my math could be a bit off) Well you get the picture. So God took seven days to create the world, or did he... What we see as evolution could simply be the method used by the creator to achieve his goal. I mean if a cave man came across the empire state building, he would at first not know how it was made, then he would figure out they used bricks and cement and then eventualy find out why the architecture allows it to stand and so on and so on. So I think thats what evolution is, God didn' just snap his fingers and poof there was man ( well maybe, depending on how long it takes for God to snap his fingers) he evolved him, and all the animals, until he was satisfied.

Thing about Science is that its just like religion in many ways and people don't realize it. We get told things by some guy in a white coat and without any evidence are expected to believe them, ( I watch CSI sometimes and think to myself, these people are just making this shit up, lol) Remember Weed is more harmful than cigarettes, scientist say so, lol. Yeah right, Anyways, Religion gets blamed for deaths of millions, but the scientists who made the atom bomb, chemical weapons, steel, gun powder, automatic weapons, air planes, armored vehicles, C4... come now, science isn't innocent.

At the end of the day, people kill people, not science or religion, they just scape goats.

For interest sake here is what the american council for drug education states as "Fact" about weed
http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm

 

[Heisenberg]

Didn't read this whole thread but here goes, Science likes theory, theory is not the same as fact, for the record, and theory's in Science are only good until a better one is thought up. Evolution I would consider more fact than theory, simply because we can see it happening even today. Hell we an see it happening on this very forum, look at how they breed strains. However that don't mean there could not have been a creator, just not a creator that fits into the description, most people find comforting. Time is relative, right? Meaning that depending on certain factors it could be faster or slower. So Why does a day to us have to be the same time as a day to God? If God could travel 1000 x the speed of light, that would mean 1 day could be a zillion years (my math could be a bit off) Well you get the picture. So God took seven days to create the world, or did he... What we see as evolution could simply be the method used by the creator to achieve his goal. I mean if a cave man came across the empire state building, he would at first not know how it was made, then he would figure out they used bricks and cement and then eventualy find out why the architecture allows it to stand and so on and so on. So I think thats what evolution is, God didn' just snap his fingers and poof there was man ( well maybe, depending on how long it takes for God to snap his fingers) he evolved him, and all the animals, until he was satisfied.

Thing about Science is that its just like religion in many ways and people don't realize it. We get told things by some guy in a white coat and without any evidence are expected to believe them, ( I watch CSI sometimes and think to myself, these people are just making this shit up, lol) Remember Weed is more harmful than cigarettes, scientist say so, lol. Yeah right, Anyways, Religion gets blamed for deaths of millions, but the scientists who made the atom bomb, chemical weapons, steel, gun powder, automatic weapons, air planes, armored vehicles, C4... come now, science isn't innocent.

At the end of the day, people kill people, not science or religion, they just scape goats.

For interest sake here is what the american council for drug education states as "Fact" about weed
http://www.acde.org/common/Marijana.htm

Why would you expect someone to consider your posts if you are not willing to read the thread? Your post reflects an ignorance of what science is. Before you start waxing poetic about what science does and doesn't say about creation, evolution, and weed, you should educate yourself, and use better sources than CSI.

Science is a systematic way of carefully and thoroughly observing nature while using consistent logic to evaluate the results. What part of that is comparable with religion? Is it being systematic? Being careful and thorough? Or using consistent valid logic? Name one thing science has ever asked you to believe in without providing support. All of the examples of misused knowledge you cite have a useful and legitimate side as well. It is a lazy mind that blames the acquirement of that knowledge instead of the application. I suggest you learn a little more about what science is and how it operates before you make posts in this section pertaining to it. Half baked commentary based on misconceptions and ill education just wont cut it.

"If an outsider perceives 'something wrong' with a core scientific model, the humble and justified response of that curious outsider should be to ask 'what mistake am I making?' before assuming 100% of the experts are wrong." - David Brin

 

[tyler.durden]

Why would you expect someone to consider your posts if you are not willing to read the thread? Your post reflects an ignorance of what science is. Before you start waxing poetic about what science does and doesn't say about creation, evolution, and weed, you should educate yourself, and use better sources than CSI.

Science is a systematic way of carefully and thoroughly observing nature while using consistent logic to evaluate the results. What part of that is comparable with religion? Is it being systematic? Being careful and thorough? Or using consistent valid logic? Name one thing science has ever asked you to believe in without providing support. All of the examples of misused knowledge you cite have a useful and legitimate side as well. It is a lazy mind that blames the acquirement of that knowledge instead of the application. I suggest you learn a little more about what science is and how it operates before you make posts in this section pertaining to it. Half baked commentary based on misconceptions and ill education just wont cut it.

"If an outsider perceives 'something wrong' with a core scientific model, the humble and justified response of that curious outsider should be to ask 'what mistake am I making?' before assuming 100% of the experts are wrong." - David Brin

All right, some discord! We're back in business

 

[tyler.durden]

Boggles my mind sometimes. I asked a very closed minded friend once why we can see the moon & why it shines @ night.. His reply was "because it's a star". from that point on, I realized everyone is not equal.

Yeah, this type of thing is both funny and sad. A couple of years ago, I was at the park with my young son. He was playing with a group of children he had just met, when it started to drizzle. One of the children asked my son if he knew why it rains, and my son started in with water vapor rising and condensing, etc.. The kid interrupted my son with, 'nuh-uh! Mom, why does it rain?' She didn't miss a beat exclaiming, 'It rains because Jesus is crying'. I was stunned, but my son just rolled his eyes. After a minute or so, I asked the mother if she really believed that. Her reply was, 'of course not, but it's easy for children to understand'. I told her that my son (about the same age) had no trouble understanding the simple physical process of rain, and she stated, 'yes, he seems very bright...' I then asked her if she knew the process, and she replied, 'not really'. True story. I often think back to a Simpson's episode where Lisa finds the angel skeleton and seeks to explain it scientifically, when Flanders shouts, "Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"

 

[Luger187]

Yeah, this type of thing is both funny and sad. A couple of years ago, I was at the park with my young son. He was playing with a group of children he had just met, when it started to drizzle. One of the children asked my son if he knew why it rains, and my son started in with water vapor rising and condensing, etc.. The kid interrupted my son with, 'nuh-uh! Mom, why does it rain?' She didn't miss a beat exclaiming, 'It rains because Jesus is crying'. I was stunned, but my son just rolled his eyes. After a minute or so, I asked the mother if she really believed that. Her reply was, 'of course not, but it's easy for children to understand'. I told her that my son (about the same age) had no trouble understanding the simple physical process of rain, and she stated, 'yes, he seems very bright...' I then asked her if she knew the process, and she replied, 'not really'. True story. I often think back to a Simpson's episode where Lisa finds the angel skeleton and seeks to explain it scientifically, when Flanders shouts, "Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends! Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!"

that shit is really gonna harm those kids in the future. if your son was already that far ahead at that point, imagine when hes 25

 

[Heisenberg]

Heh, I was taking it easy on him because he is new.

Back to the topic that no one cares about, another example of irrational behavior even skeptics are prone to is discussed here.

The idea is that once we pick something like a brand or sports team we eventually incorporate that into our identities. We then defend those icons when they are attacked as if someone was attacking us personally. Think about all the mac vs PC fights on the net. Occasionally if our brands really let us down, we then claim the brand has betrayed us, and justify loyalty to a new brand.

How many of you are sports fans that feel elated when your team wins, and take it personally when your team looses?

 

[tyler.durden]

that shit is really gonna harm those kids in the future. if your son was already that far ahead at that point, imagine when hes 25

Right! He is an amazing kid. We raised him free of mysticism: no Santa/Fairytales, no Disney, no gods. Heavy on the science and skepticism: he loves physics, esp. cosmology and biology. He wants to work toward biological immortality, at least greatly retarding the aging process. His reasoning is that it would be the greatest value ever offered: if we didn't age. we would have time to discover everything else. I let him know that I think most theists wouldn't want this product as they have their afterlife, to which he replied, 'That's okay...' Who's the proud papa?

 

[Apathy One x]

ok science guys, explain to me how matter is created. Science says energy to matter conversion and visa-versa is possible but creating matter or energy from nothing is not. If that scientific fact is true, where does everything come from

 

[tyler.durden]

Heh, I was taking it easy on him because he is new.

Back to the topic that no one cares about, another example of irrational behavior even skeptics are prone to is discussed here.

The idea is that once we pick something like a brand or sports team we eventually incorporate that into our identities. We then defend those icons when they are attacked as if someone was attacking us personally. Think about all the mac vs PC fights on the net. Occasionally if our brands really let us down, we then claim the brand has betrayed us, and justify loyalty to a new brand.

How many of you are sports fans that feel elated when your team wins, and take it personally when your team looses?

I just found myself doing this exact thing! I have always LOVED the Samsung brand, irrationally so. Most of my electronics are Samsung, and they really are all great quality products. But I found myself touting the brand (I get no commission from this) and debating it's qualities against other brands. That is until I bought a Samsung Moment smartphone. POS!!! It's made my life so miserable for the last year, I actually did feel betrayed by Samsung, as if we had some long standing alliance. Ridiculous...

And that's nothing compared to my utter devotion to the Bulls in their heyday: In the 90s my week was literally made or broken by their wins and losses...

 

[tyler.durden]

ok science guys, explain to me how matter is created. Science says energy to matter conversion and visa-versa is possible but creating matter or energy from nothing is not. If that scientific fact is true, where does everything come from

That's the Big-Bizang! A small fraction of a second after the bang, many kinds of particles and their anti-particles, in equal amounts, roamed about and collided with each other immersed in tremendous heat. In this hot cosmic furnace, many different types of particles were being cooked, not necessarily the familiar quarks (the constituents of protons and neutrons) or electrons. As the universe expanded and cooled, a sort of Darwinistic selection mechanism not only biased the creation of quarks and electrons over other types of particles, but also generated the excess number of particles over anti-particles. Surviving the annihilation with their antimatter cousins, these excess particles organized themselves into more complex structures, until eventually atoms, mostly hydrogen, were formed when the universe was about 300,000 years old. And so on. We still have a lot of details to fill in, but it's a good start...

 

[Apathy One x]

Ah yes the big bang, and did the big bang have an energy source? or was it just an explosion from nothing that was so powerful it created all energy and matter?

 

[Heisenberg]

ok science guys, explain to me how matter is created. Science says energy to matter conversion and visa-versa is possible but creating matter or energy from nothing is not. If that scientific fact is true, where does everything come from

The laws of thermodynamics are not facts, they are expressions of phenomena we observe to always be the same under certain conditions. Apparently at the beginning these conditions were different.

 

[Apathy One x]

Nice save! Science only works under the right conditions. So then what pray tell changed right in the beginning? What external force changed the well established law of science sufficiently to render it moot?

 

[ginjawarrior]

or was it just an explosion from nothing that was so powerful it created all energy and matter?

as hard as it is to believe the universe energy total= zero

we know that even when we create a vacuum particles will appear then dissipate back into nothing..

the universe as we know it is in the process of dissipating, one point in the very very distant future there will be a point where everything has faded away leaving a timeless void. Nothingness rdy for the next fluctuation to spring into existance

it seems bonkers no doubt but theres also a deep beauty in its simplicity the people who deny this stuff are missing out on just how amazing reality really is..

 

[ginjawarrior]

[video=youtube;uQSoaiubuA0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQSoaiubuA0&feature=relmfu[/video]

 

[Heisenberg]

Nice save! Science only works under the right conditions. So then what pray tell changed right in the beginning? What external force changed the well established law of science sufficiently to render it moot?

Science works under any conditions that are of the natural world. Science is a systematic way of carefully and thoroughly observing nature while using consistent logic to evaluate the results. Do you see anything about that statement which puts limits on conditions? The only limit is, the phenomena has to be of nature.

Scientific laws are precise codifications of observations. Thermodynamic laws deal with the total energy of a closed system. We do not know if the universe is a closed system, or if it was always a closed system. In any case, the big bang theory does not say that there was a time when the total energy of the universe was different than it is now. It may have been, in which case your argument would hold weight, but you would be arguing against something other than the big bang theory. The idea that the universe came from nothing is in fact contradictory to the theory, which stipulates a singularity; far from 'nothing'.

Of course this is over simplified but even a cursory read of the models should reveal your misconceptions.

 

[ginjawarrior]

2 hours of well spent time

[video=youtube;FXliM19h6YI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXliM19h6YI[/video]
[video=youtube;rQ8rd7AkMmY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ8rd7AkMmY&feature=related[/video]