[_ Old Earth _] God´s Love v. Scientific Chaos

[jwu]

So you´re saying I have to acknowledge science´s superiority over God because I can communicate over the internet ?

Putting science over God is something entirely different than not calling scientific theories "baloney" by definition.

There is absolutely nothing and I mean nothing "scientific" about the internet . 99 to 1 ratio still stands. You´re equating communication with Science. Just like that other pseudo- scientist who posted that the printing press was a "scientific invention".

I guess it wasn't science that came up with all the physics behind the internet; transistors, (semi)conductors and so on...this is getting ridiculous.

 

[ArtGuy]

That's one for http://www.fstdt.com/

Oh man, that site is a comedy goldmine. Thanks for the link.

This is probably the funniest thing I've read all week:

and the theory of relativity......that all things are relative...thats false!
people that believe that all things are relative are really confused...

this computer isnt really in front of me...its my mind thinking it is...its all relative...yes is yes...and yes is no....
relativity contradicts!

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

There is absolutely nothing and I mean nothing "scientific" about the internet . 99 to 1 ratio still stands. You´re equating communication with Science. Just like that other pseudo- scientist who posted the printing press was a "scientific invention".

I guess it wasn't science that came up with all the physics behind the internet; transistors, (semi)conductors and so on...this is getting ridiculous.

That´s like saying because " science " went into making a paperclip, all of science is factual. Keep that theoretical baloney a comin´

99% to 1 %. Still standing strong.

 

[jwu]

That´s like saying because " science " went into making a paperclip, all of science is factual. Keep that theoretical baloney a comin´

That has nothing to do with the question if science is involved in the internet or not.

Still standing strong.

Ehm...no, not really.


PS: This one is really good:

"Have you ever seen an airplane or a bird? They defy the theory of gravity. Dont' say stupid stuff..... theorys can be broken, that's why they're not laws....."

 

[moniker]

There is absolutely nothing and I mean nothing "scientific" about the internet . 99 to 1 ratio still stands. You´re equating communication with Science. Just like that other pseudo- scientist who posted the printing press was a "scientific invention".

I guess it wasn't science that came up with all the physics behind the internet; transistors, (semi)conductors and so on...this is getting ridiculous.

That´s like saying because " science " went into making a paperclip, all of science is factual. Keep that theoretical baloney a comin´

99% to 1 %. Still standing strong.

Actually, no. Very much no. It is precisely like saying that because scientific understandings went into making a paperclip then a paperclip is the product of science. What a tautology.

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

There is absolutely nothing and I mean nothing "scientific" about the internet . 99 to 1 ratio still stands. You´re equating communication with Science. Just like that other pseudo- scientist who posted the printing press was a "scientific invention".

I guess it wasn't science that came up with all the physics behind the internet; transistors, (semi)conductors and so on...this is getting ridiculous.

That´s like saying because " science " went into making a paperclip, all of science is factual. Keep that theoretical baloney a comin´

99% to 1 %. Still standing strong.

Actually, no. Very much no. It is precisely like saying that because scientific understandings went into making a paperclip then a paperclip is the product of science. What a tautology.

Hey Moniker , that´s not what I´m saying. Anyway, why don´t you adress
the OP ?

 

[moniker]

Actually, no. Very much no. It is precisely like saying that because scientific understandings went into making a paperclip then a paperclip is the product of science. What a tautology.

Hey Moniker , that´s not what I´m saying. Anyway, why don´t you adress
the OP ?

Because I already did. Twice. Well 3 times technically, although the last was a response to Heidi and not yourself. So sorry that those did not make it through your selective vision.

Oh and while that may not have been your intent with that post, it certainly was Jwu's. In that light this response of yours is rather telling.

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

Actually, no. Very much no. It is precisely like saying that because scientific understandings went into making a paperclip then a paperclip is the product of science. What a tautology.

Hey Moniker , that´s not what I´m saying. Anyway, why don´t you adress
the OP ?

Because I already did. Twice. Well 3 times technically, although the last was a response to Heidi and not yourself. So sorry that those did not make it through your selective vision.

Oh and while that may not have been your intent with that post, it certainly was Jwu's. In that light this response of yours is rather telling.

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

 

[moniker]

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

 

[reznwerks]

decaf

There is absolutely nothing and I mean nothing "scientific" about the internet . 99 to 1 ratio still stands. You´re equating communication with Science. Just like that other pseudo- scientist who posted the printing press was a "scientific invention".

I guess it wasn't science that came up with all the physics behind the internet; transistors, (semi)conductors and so on...this is getting ridiculous.

That´s like saying because " science " went into making a paperclip, all of science is factual. Keep that theoretical baloney a comin´

99% to 1 %. Still standing strong.

Ever try decaf?

 

[Khristeeanos]

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

The Columbine school shootings were done by athiests who hated most everything, especially Christians.

 

[reznwerks]

solution

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

The Columbine school shootings were done by athiests who hated most everything, especially Christians.

Is attributing atheism to any problems your solution to everything? You don't understand what atheism is so you shouldn't use it. I don't think atheism was a factor in any way as atheism is simply a lack of belief. It's like having one less course for supper. If it's there fine if it's not fine. Here are some links on Dybold and Harris. See if you can find other problems that may have led to the behavior they exhibited other than "Atheism".
http://columbine.free2host.net/eric.html
http://columbine.free2host.net/dylan.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Harri ... an_Klebold

 

[moniker]

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

The Columbine school shootings were done by athiests who hated most everything, especially Christians.

Is this the part where we play the 'who's committed the most/worst attrocities' game? Because I really never see the point of it, but I am pretty good thanks to being a bit of a history buff. Afterall, horrible people have used everything within their grasp to justify their actions. Be it religion, psuedo-science, an eclipse of the moon, just about anything that the mind can imagine and history books are filled with the various crimes against humanity. Noone seems to care about the periods of peace and prosperity, it's always defined by the age of the battle. Hundred Years War, WWII, Revolutionary War, Civil.

Thank goodness Columbine was due to godlessness, though. This should remove it from the list of things video-games have caused, right. Just like how Elvis' hips were an abomination back in the 50's that caused rampant sex and such until the true enemy (comic books and movies) could replace him for all those unnatural youth trends.
Yes this is a tangential rant but I really hate how various media always gets scapegoated and I've been having a bad day so just ignore it.

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

The Columbine school shootings were done by athiests who hated most everything, especially Christians.

Amen to that Khris!!! You tell him girl !!!!

But getting back to the OP... I firmly believe that the anti-Christian, paganistic - nihilistic - satanic cosmogeny that is taught in schools today
destroys the hearts and minds of Americans, starting with our children.

I´d rather have kids believing in a loving God , accepting The Bible and its commandments than to teach them Evolution , teaching them they are nothing more than animals, evolved by chance and owing allegiance to nothing or nobody (other than the media hero du jour, of course ).

Loving God v. Scientific Chaos ?

 

[moniker]

But getting back to the OP... I firmly believe that the anti-Christian, paganistic - nihilistic - satanic cosmogeny that is taught in schools today destroys the hearts and minds of Americans, starting with our children.

I understand that you believe in this, but would you mind justifying that belief with more than gnashing your teeth? As well as how schools are anti-christian, pagan, and nihilistic. Oh, and what is the cosmogeny taught to children which goes against the concept of God?

 

[reznwerks]

taught

[quote="The Ascetic Crusader":747e8]You teach a child he comes from nothing , he´ll amount to nothing. Period.

:-?

So Isaac Asimov amounted to nothing? Douglas Adams? Einstein? I'm sure I could find a list of others if you'd like. You teach a child he comes from nothing, he'll amount to all that he desires to be and can be.

The Columbine school shootings were done by athiests who hated most everything, especially Christians.

Amen to that Khris!!! You tell him girl !!!!

But getting back to the OP... I firmly believe that the anti-Christian, paganistic - nihilistic - satanic cosmogeny that is taught in schools today
destroys the hearts and minds of Americans, starting with our children.
The only problems is that is not what is being taught.

I´d rather have kids believing in a loving God , accepting The Bible and its commandments than to teach them Evolution , teaching them they are nothing more than animals, evolved by chance and owing allegiance to nothing or nobody (other than the media hero du jour, of course ).

Loving God v. Scientific Chaos ?
Why not just have them believe in Santa? This way kids will never grow up. Santa is the youth version of Santa don't you think? He has many of the attributes of God. He knows all , sees all, rewards and punishes you based on whether you've been good or not. You want them to believe in the 10 commandments? How about the penalty that goes with them which is usually death for any infraction? I mean if you want to be gung ho about your beliefs lets go all the way. You want them to believe the bible when the HARD evidence contradicts it? WHY? Sometimes the truth hurts especially when you were told something else. Why teach them things that probably aren't true when in the end they will only be disappointed? Man is an animal and has all the traits of an animal. If God wanted us to be different he would have made us different. Why do you feel you need to pay homage to an invisible unprovable being? What is wrong with owing allegience to ones fellow man? At least we know there are other humans. By the way you can cheer lead all you want here but just like believing doesn't make it true yelling comes in second on results. How about presenting some evidence for your cause?

[/quote:747e8]

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

Re: taught

Why not just have them believe in Santa? This way kids will never grow up.

Yeah, just keep mocking Christianity. After all , the standard "scientific chaos" paradigm is soooo much better, ain´t it.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

You realize you're just perpetuating a false dichotemy don't you?

Science finds things out. It does. It applies the knowledge it gains over time to the world and out pop technologies. It doesn't have to be exactly precise, but it's close enough to do things that are incredible when you actually look at them close enough.

You don't however, you sit there pretending to be smart by going against the grain of us 'foolish atheists,' and you make wild, and fairly inane claims about what science is. I claim that you don't have that authority, that you know less about what you are talking about than you pat yourself on the back for and that your claim is blindly idiotic.

You say 99% of science of baloney? Well 70% of science has to be right to within .01 accuracy for you to be looking at a glass screen at pixels translated by microtransistors from logical machine code stored using some of the latest in material science.

You can stick that baloney in your ear.

 

[The Ascetic Crusader]

You say 99% of science of baloney? Well 70% of science has to be right to within .01 accuracy for you to be looking at a glass screen at pixels translated by microtransistors from logical machine code stored using some of the latest in material science.

Hey genius, I´m talking about competing cosmogonies here ...not silicon chips. Duh !

 

[ArtGuy]

Hey genius, I´m talking about competing cosmogonies here ...not silicon chips. Duh !

So when you said 99% of science was baloney, you were just kidding, or what? It's not our fault that you play fast and loose with the English language.