Richard Dawkins Hero

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Richard Dawkins Hero

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 12 of 22 < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >

TheJudge 15 Jun 15 9.09pm
Quote nickgusset at 15 Jun 2015 8.27pm It's banter lead to trouble. Just don't call anyone a t word. Tory ?
Alert a moderator to this post

TheJudge

15 Jun 15 9.09pm

Quote nickgusset at 15 Jun 2015 8.27pm

It's banter lead to trouble. Just don't call anyone a t word.

Tory ?

Alert a moderator to this post

reborn 16 Jun 15 8.18am
Quote TheJudge at 15 Jun 2015 8.19pm Unholy banter. noun: banter the playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks. "there was much good-natured banter" Not much sign of that here from you; Quote TheJudge at 15 Jun 2015 11.46am Quote reborn at 14 Jun 2015 9.12pm You sound like you need a hug....go to the local church, they will be nice to you I promise. There would be plenty of room inside. The thing is Reborn, I don't need a hug from your God bothering friends or "Jesus", because I have a real family who I can hug any time I like. It is only your deluded, stupid, smug, blind arrogance that makes you think that people should all seek a religious crutch like the one you clearly need. Your whole basis of belief is flawed and made up by people who didn't know any better. I'm being mean to you because your smug attitude really is quite repugnant. It wasn't banter by you, it was frothing at the mouth insults, so blinded by your own point of view that you couldn't even see that you were being 'bantered' Called on it, you now insist on lying and pretending it was just some fun. Never mind, you can lie to yourself, you can lie to others even, but God sees all Now THATS banter, even put it in bold so you couldn't miss it My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs
Alert a moderator to this post

reborn 16 Jun 15 8.18am

Quote TheJudge at 15 Jun 2015 8.19pm

Unholy banter.

noun: banter

the playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks.
"there was much good-natured banter"

Not much sign of that here from you;

Quote TheJudge at 15 Jun 2015 11.46am

Quote reborn at 14 Jun 2015 9.12pm

You sound like you need a hug....go to the local church, they will be nice to you I promise.

There would be plenty of room inside.

The thing is Reborn, I don't need a hug from your God bothering friends or "Jesus", because I have a real family who I can hug any time I like. It is only your deluded, stupid, smug, blind arrogance that makes you think that people should all seek a religious crutch like the one you clearly need. Your whole basis of belief is flawed and made up by people who didn't know any better.
I'm being mean to you because your smug attitude really is quite repugnant.

It wasn't banter by you, it was frothing at the mouth insults, so blinded by your own point of view that you couldn't even see that you were being 'bantered'

Called on it, you now insist on lying and pretending it was just some fun. Never mind, you can lie to yourself, you can lie to others even, but God sees all

Now THATS banter, even put it in bold so you couldn't miss it

My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs

Alert a moderator to this post

TheJudge 16 Jun 15 8.59am
I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face.
Alert a moderator to this post

TheJudge

16 Jun 15 8.59am

I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face.

Alert a moderator to this post

SirPeanut Keston 16 Jun 15 9.37am
[Link] This is spot on. There are two kinds of person in this world: 1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Alert a moderator to this post

SirPeanut

Keston 16 Jun 15 9.37am

[Link]

This is spot on.

There are two kinds of person in this world:
1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Alert a moderator to this post

reborn 16 Jun 15 9.49am
Quote TheJudge at 16 Jun 2015 8.59am I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face. Well done, you're learning, that actually IS banter. My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs
Alert a moderator to this post

reborn 16 Jun 15 9.49am

Quote TheJudge at 16 Jun 2015 8.59am

I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face.

Well done, you're learning, that actually IS banter.

My username has nothing to do with my religious beliefs

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 16 Jun 15 9.53am
Quote derben at 15 Jun 2015 4.46pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 Jun 2015 3.48pm Quote derben at 14 Jun 2015 9.26pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Jun 2015 9.25pm Quote derben at 13 Jun 2015 9.18pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Jun 2015 8.57pm Quote derben at 13 Jun 2015 6.14pm Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Jun 2015 5.27pm Quote derben at 12 Jun 2015 10.59pm Well established principle! Basically what they are saying is, "we don't understand how the universe came into being, so we will just say it happened". Because scientifically we can only demonstrate it as a theory, based on existing understanding, to within fractions of a second after the event (this is one of the principle reasons for particle accelerators to replicate). Its one of a number of theories, that are in competition, the evidence accumilated points towards this being the most probable event, based on what is known. Where was this 'singularity' and how did it come into existence? There wasn't yet a where for it to occur (as the singularity created space-time). As to why a transition occurred creating the universe, that's the big question, can't say I know the answer to that. That's then next big question. There is always a point at which knowledge gives way, to the unknown. For the record, I don't reject the possibility of a 'god', only that of the god presented by Religion and the cases made by those faiths. Divinity is a metaphysical debate, and as such is an argument about abstract associated concepts, rather than quantifiable qualities. Edited by jamiemartin721 (13 Jun 2015 9.01pm) I don't see how there can be this singularity containing the universe in an infinitely condensed form if there is no place for it to exist. Your view on the possibility of a God but a rejection of mankind's religions is pretty much my own view, although I've no idea what your last sentence means. That's the hard bit to get your head around, the dimensional aspects. Space-time is a dimension of reality, but everything that exists in all dimensions, although it may appear differently (and be perceived differently, dependent on the point of perception). Sorry, don't understand your banter old chap. A good starting point in Dimensions is [Link] Essentially as you traverse dimensions, properties of objects change. The same way a line, becomes a square, becomes a cube (3d) and then a tessarat (4d) (as you apply more dimensions). Topologically a similar phenomena applies to physical dimensions. We exist kind of three dimensionally but experience the effect of a fourth dimesion (space and time) at any given instant (where as if we were fourth dimensional, experiencing existence of a 5th dimension, we'd experience time and space as constants, rather than processes of change). So if the 'Big Bang' creates space-time, the universe is capable of existing prior to that, simply in a form in which space-time is non-existant (prior to that event). As you can imagine at these kinds of points, we're talking about a universe that exists in a format we would be incapable of real description, given our entire perception is geared towards three and four dimensions. Also, at this point you get into the really hard kind of maths that sounds more akin to people talking about LSD trips than the stuff you and I know from school There is no proof whatsoever that these extra dimensions exist, only theories. It is just used to try to explain where this singularity was before the Big Bang. Theories require proof, even if its a consistent mathematical construct based on existing knowledge, which is what separates a theory from a hypothesis. Proving something that is essentially non-existent - However as you can demonstrate the existence of higher and lower dimensions, its more than just 'faith or an idea'. The entanglement process of photons and 'quantum strangeness' either are false, or require at least one higher dimension to function (subatomic particles do not follow a principle of persistence in time and space). Of course its possible physics is wrong, and that there is a flaw in theory, that means only four dimensions exist, but to the best of human knowledge dimensions beyond space-time exist. Of course proving something beyond a singularity point, at which human knowledge breaks down, and occurred potentially only once, is as impossible as disproving the existence of god, because you're into metaphysics (and you can only disprove traits related to a concept - ie you can disprove that god is merciful, but you cannot disprove the existence of god). So whilst you can't prove it, it is consistent with what is known, and does not require that what is known is broken by the theory. Scientifically speaking, you work with the most probable of outcomes. No one works with proof, because to prove something to be definite requires measurement of all variables, and even then it becomes dependent on the scale of measurements. Entropy demonstrates you can never be certain of any outcome, outside of strict control measures. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 16 Jun 15 9.53am

Quote derben at 15 Jun 2015 4.46pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 15 Jun 2015 3.48pm

Quote derben at 14 Jun 2015 9.26pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Jun 2015 9.25pm

Quote derben at 13 Jun 2015 9.18pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Jun 2015 8.57pm

Quote derben at 13 Jun 2015 6.14pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 13 Jun 2015 5.27pm

Quote derben at 12 Jun 2015 10.59pm

Well established principle! Basically what they are saying is, "we don't understand how the universe came into being, so we will just say it happened".

Because scientifically we can only demonstrate it as a theory, based on existing understanding, to within fractions of a second after the event (this is one of the principle reasons for particle accelerators to replicate).

Its one of a number of theories, that are in competition, the evidence accumilated points towards this being the most probable event, based on what is known.

Where was this 'singularity' and how did it come into existence?

There wasn't yet a where for it to occur (as the singularity created space-time). As to why a transition occurred creating the universe, that's the big question, can't say I know the answer to that. That's then next big question.

There is always a point at which knowledge gives way, to the unknown.

For the record, I don't reject the possibility of a 'god', only that of the god presented by Religion and the cases made by those faiths. Divinity is a metaphysical debate, and as such is an argument about abstract associated concepts, rather than quantifiable qualities.

Edited by jamiemartin721 (13 Jun 2015 9.01pm)

I don't see how there can be this singularity containing the universe in an infinitely condensed form if there is no place for it to exist.

Your view on the possibility of a God but a rejection of mankind's religions is pretty much my own view, although I've no idea what your last sentence means.

That's the hard bit to get your head around, the dimensional aspects. Space-time is a dimension of reality, but everything that exists in all dimensions, although it may appear differently (and be perceived differently, dependent on the point of perception).

Sorry, don't understand your banter old chap.

A good starting point in Dimensions is [Link]

Essentially as you traverse dimensions, properties of objects change. The same way a line, becomes a square, becomes a cube (3d) and then a tessarat (4d) (as you apply more dimensions). Topologically a similar phenomena applies to physical dimensions.

We exist kind of three dimensionally but experience the effect of a fourth dimesion (space and time) at any given instant (where as if we were fourth dimensional, experiencing existence of a 5th dimension, we'd experience time and space as constants, rather than processes of change).

So if the 'Big Bang' creates space-time, the universe is capable of existing prior to that, simply in a form in which space-time is non-existant (prior to that event).

As you can imagine at these kinds of points, we're talking about a universe that exists in a format we would be incapable of real description, given our entire perception is geared towards three and four dimensions.

Also, at this point you get into the really hard kind of maths that sounds more akin to people talking about LSD trips than the stuff you and I know from school

There is no proof whatsoever that these extra dimensions exist, only theories. It is just used to try to explain where this singularity was before the Big Bang.

Theories require proof, even if its a consistent mathematical construct based on existing knowledge, which is what separates a theory from a hypothesis. Proving something that is essentially non-existent - However as you can demonstrate the existence of higher and lower dimensions, its more than just 'faith or an idea'.

The entanglement process of photons and 'quantum strangeness' either are false, or require at least one higher dimension to function (subatomic particles do not follow a principle of persistence in time and space).

Of course its possible physics is wrong, and that there is a flaw in theory, that means only four dimensions exist, but to the best of human knowledge dimensions beyond space-time exist.

Of course proving something beyond a singularity point, at which human knowledge breaks down, and occurred potentially only once, is as impossible as disproving the existence of god, because you're into metaphysics (and you can only disprove traits related to a concept - ie you can disprove that god is merciful, but you cannot disprove the existence of god).

So whilst you can't prove it, it is consistent with what is known, and does not require that what is known is broken by the theory. Scientifically speaking, you work with the most probable of outcomes. No one works with proof, because to prove something to be definite requires measurement of all variables, and even then it becomes dependent on the scale of measurements.

Entropy demonstrates you can never be certain of any outcome, outside of strict control measures.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 16 Jun 15 10.02am
Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding. Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm) Probably, although the point I'm trying to get at is that there is really a difference between being a Christian and someone who follows the teachings of Christ, and those two things are a massive difference. Also, we should expect more of ourselves as a species than simply replacing ourselves and going with the flow. Especially when you're staking your immortal soul on the outcome (I don't believe in that, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily base my decision on convenience). Especially as those 'major' players contradict one another. I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 16 Jun 15 10.02am

Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm
I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding.

Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm)

Probably, although the point I'm trying to get at is that there is really a difference between being a Christian and someone who follows the teachings of Christ, and those two things are a massive difference.

Also, we should expect more of ourselves as a species than simply replacing ourselves and going with the flow. Especially when you're staking your immortal soul on the outcome (I don't believe in that, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily base my decision on convenience). Especially as those 'major' players contradict one another.

I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Superfly The sun always shines in Catford 16 Jun 15 10.04am
Quote reborn at 16 Jun 2015 9.49am Quote TheJudge at 16 Jun 2015 8.59am I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face. Well done, you're learning, that actually IS banter. Judge, you can pretty much say what you like but you can't insult other users. Have a read through the forum rules if you need clarification. [Link] Lend me a Tenor 31 May to 3 June 2017 John McIntosh Arts Centre London Oratory School SW6 1RX with Superfly in the chorus [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Superfly

The sun always shines in Catford 16 Jun 15 10.04am

Quote reborn at 16 Jun 2015 9.49am

Quote TheJudge at 16 Jun 2015 8.59am

I don't want to upset Superfly again so I will just have you imagine me sitting in front of my laptop with a " I'm glad he doesn't live next door to me" look on my face.

Well done, you're learning, that actually IS banter.

Judge, you can pretty much say what you like but you can't insult other users. Have a read through the forum rules if you need clarification.

[Link]

Lend me a Tenor

31 May to 3 June 2017

John McIntosh Arts Centre
London Oratory School
SW6 1RX

with Superfly in the chorus
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Superfly The sun always shines in Catford 16 Jun 15 10.05am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding. Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm) Probably, although the point I'm trying to get at is that there is really a difference between being a Christian and someone who follows the teachings of Christ, and those two things are a massive difference. Also, we should expect more of ourselves as a species than simply replacing ourselves and going with the flow. Especially when you're staking your immortal soul on the outcome (I don't believe in that, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily base my decision on convenience). Especially as those 'major' players contradict one another. I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones. Fight? Lend me a Tenor 31 May to 3 June 2017 John McIntosh Arts Centre London Oratory School SW6 1RX with Superfly in the chorus [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Superfly

The sun always shines in Catford 16 Jun 15 10.05am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am

Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm
I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding.

Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm)

I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones.

Fight?

Lend me a Tenor

31 May to 3 June 2017

John McIntosh Arts Centre
London Oratory School
SW6 1RX

with Superfly in the chorus
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 16 Jun 15 10.34am
Quote Superfly at 16 Jun 2015 10.05am Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding. Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm) Probably, although the point I'm trying to get at is that there is really a difference between being a Christian and someone who follows the teachings of Christ, and those two things are a massive difference. Also, we should expect more of ourselves as a species than simply replacing ourselves and going with the flow. Especially when you're staking your immortal soul on the outcome (I don't believe in that, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily base my decision on convenience). Especially as those 'major' players contradict one another. I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones. Fight? So its the Norse gods then, they seem to be pretty fight orientated. Still, it'll make summer holidays more interesting. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 16 Jun 15 10.34am

Quote Superfly at 16 Jun 2015 10.05am

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am

Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm
I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding.

Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm)

I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones.

Fight?

So its the Norse gods then, they seem to be pretty fight orientated. Still, it'll make summer holidays more interesting.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

EaglesEaglesEagles 16 Jun 15 11.24am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding. Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm) Probably, although the point I'm trying to get at is that there is really a difference between being a Christian and someone who follows the teachings of Christ, and those two things are a massive difference. Also, we should expect more of ourselves as a species than simply replacing ourselves and going with the flow. Especially when you're staking your immortal soul on the outcome (I don't believe in that, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily base my decision on convenience). Especially as those 'major' players contradict one another. I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones. Well certainly in academic circles, being someone who follows the teachings of Christ is highly debated. The method of interpretation of parables themselves is one such area. That, I suppose, proves your point that it is possible to engage in and explore the many investigations and viewpoints in the area of Christ's teaching. That's fair. I wouldn't like to think I, or many other Christians would base their faith on a sense of convenience or hedging one's bets. That undoubtedly happens among some people but I see that genuine inspiration and a feeling of real faith and love is inspired in people. I agree it isn't a particularly attractive feature of monotheistic faiths that the immortal soul of the believer is at stake, but I would say that when living one's life according to Christian principles (which may be drawn up by churches) a religious person does not constantly have his mind on avoiding condemnation. Although it is implicit, I think that one's actions became a natural almost instinctive facet to the way one lives. Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (16 Jun 2015 11.25am) I ain't got nuthin' funny to say. Sorry.
Alert a moderator to this post

EaglesEaglesEagles

16 Jun 15 11.24am

Send a Private Message to EaglesEaglesEagles

Quote jamiemartin721 at 16 Jun 2015 10.02am

Quote EaglesEaglesEagles at 15 Jun 2015 8.51pm
I think Jamie, that you expect and hope for too much of the human race in their search for understanding.

Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (15 Jun 2015 8.54pm)

I mean, how do you decide which God(or gods) are the right ones.

Well certainly in academic circles, being someone who follows the teachings of Christ is highly debated. The method of interpretation of parables themselves is one such area.
That, I suppose, proves your point that it is possible to engage in and explore the many investigations and viewpoints in the area of Christ's teaching. That's fair.

I wouldn't like to think I, or many other Christians would base their faith on a sense of convenience or hedging one's bets. That undoubtedly happens among some people but I see that genuine inspiration and a feeling of real faith and love is inspired in people.
I agree it isn't a particularly attractive feature of monotheistic faiths that the immortal soul of the believer is at stake, but I would say that when living one's life according to Christian principles (which may be drawn up by churches) a religious person does not constantly have his mind on avoiding condemnation. Although it is implicit, I think that one's actions became a natural almost instinctive facet to the way one lives.

Edited by EaglesEaglesEagles (16 Jun 2015 11.25am)

I ain't got nuthin' funny to say. Sorry.

Alert a moderator to this post

Shifty97 Croydon 16 Jun 15 11.48am
The guy just coppies the words of David Hume, he argues poorly, not a hero in my eyes but he is entitled to his opinion
Alert a moderator to this post

Shifty97

Croydon 16 Jun 15 11.48am

The guy just coppies the words of David Hume, he argues poorly, not a hero in my eyes but he is entitled to his opinion

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 12 of 22 < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Richard Dawkins Hero

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors