Gotta Vent

[jujubee]

People are going to get pissy with each other regardless if you're talking about religion or images - it's usually the same people getting pissy too. It's sad when you can't discuss strong beliefs - that's what causes repression and animosity.

Perhaps this forum is not the proper place for it, but I'm not the one who put religion in my tagline nor am I the one who brought the removal up. It is what it is. You feel it needs to be censored, I don't think statements should.

[studioDIM]

Why of two long, technical posts, with findable and verifiable facts in it (i did verify most of the base rules at school, aged 14-19, with hands on experiments in fully fledged chemical labs) i see refuted one point, which is by the way already discussed in the same post it originates from?

Are you reading and chosing selectively not to dwell on difficult truths, or you are automatically blinded by whatever falls into the realm of the less "Wao", or ultimately, realise by superior knowledge of science that i am talking gibberish, that diffusion of gases through liquids doesn't happen, or emergent behaviour doesn't exist?
I am baffled.

Hear me on this one, though, please:

The ex instruction minister of Italy proposed the SAME thing the Bush govt. did about evolution out of learning programs, one month after the stuff was voted in the US.

Ms. Letizia Moratti, the aforementioned ex-minister, now major of Milan, is a long standing member of the Carlyle Group.

The Carlyle Group is that group of mates with interests everywhere, but with the key ones in defence and information technology and connections to any powerhouse of the US of A.
Th Bush family, and the bin-laden family (not usama himself, though) have been at some point in the RECENT past heavy investors in the group.

If the connection is not apparent to you, i'd suggest you read a kiwi or two about it and its members.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group

This stuff against evolution at school got a MASSIVE backlash from the Scientific community at large, with a panel of Nobel Prizes from Italy and abroad, as well as a huge majority of the best italian minds around the globe to sign a petition against it.
Every single school in the nation, STUDENTS FIRST rebelled against it.
It never passed.

Another connection?
At the same time as Bush got re-elected in the us, in Italy both the Vatican AND the rightwing, teocon-bred-and-funded (by voluntary admission of highly ranked govt. members, no less) Italian government started a denigratory campaign on abortion to change the law.

That was equal to revert a PUBLIC VOTE which took place over 30 years ago, the outcome of which structured Abortion in a certain way, and made it possible, along with laying the fundations of a state-wide system of psychological support and guidance.

Another time they have been beaten, soundily, by the majority of the people, and could only end up making a mess of the psychological support system, not of the law itself.

You can think pitching sacred books and science is wao, hip, or makes you row against the tide, like the first, prosecuted christians as much as you want.
I say it's propaganda, and of the worst, lowliest class.
And even well readable as such, from the origins of it, to its goals.
Should one put his good will, and the less bias possible, to it.

Lele

[Adam H. Stewart]

Constantly shifting goal line

What I love about Religion is it's ability to keep shifting it's point of view and tolerance of science mostly taking a position just behind the accepted technological beliefs of the era - it's almost as if it was INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED and it is EVOLVING to stay relevant to the society in which it struggling to maintain it relevance.

One minute we are quoting the Bible, if that is the case surely we must take the book at it's word - Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden - the whole Shibang - next people are supporting evolution but suggesting that God was behind it, if you are truely religious (the one that believes in Christ) surely you must accept word of God. The Bible leave little abiguity when it talks about were life and the Universe orginated ? It is impossible to argue half science, but if you really stick to your guns and say - right Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden until they discovered sex ( sorry I mean the apple )then this religious discussion about the origin of the species has a different color entirely, I can argue against that easily enough. But now it is decending into the psuedo science realm of intelligent design we're we borrow a bit of science and bit of faith and we mix it up all in a big pot let it bubble, now stare at those bubbles until they hypnotise you into believing.

[beestee]

People are going to get pissy with each other regardless if you're talking about religion or images - it's usually the same people getting pissy too. It's sad when you can't discuss strong beliefs - that's what causes repression and animosity.

Perhaps this forum is not the proper place for it, but I'm not the one who put religion in my tagline nor am I the one who brought the removal up. It is what it is. You feel it needs to be censored, I don't think statements should.

Plus, the only way a solution is ever figured out is through an equal discussion from both sides. Otherwise the conclusion will never seem fair.

I am not afraid to tell others that I have confidently filled in the variables in my life, and I am not afraid to tell others how and why I came to those conclusions. There is no mystery in this world for me, and I find myself more content with life knowing that. I don't consider myself as spiritual or clean as I feel that I need to be, and I do not try to come across as self-righteous. I appreciate reason more than anything else in a discussion like this, but a lot of times it just isn't there.

I am not going to change, not just because I am stubborn, lazy, or in need of explanation, but because I know for a certainty what the future holds for me, and the calamity that this world is hurtling towards...you don't have to believe in the Bible or God to see that.

A time is coming where it will be visibly apparent who God is and what we should have been doing upon the arrival of his day. No, it is not Jesus, and no, I am not speaking of the so called "rapture." Will you be able to use the excuses that you use now when it is God that you are standing before, and not your fellow man? Are you confident enough in science to completely dispell the want in your heart to believe in a supreme power, to quench the desire of defeating death?

I would rather live my life knowing that I have an accountability to God rather than science...what is a persons accountability to science? Seems to me that people want to believe in science so that they have no accountability to a supreme being. That way they can live their lives the way that they want without worrying about the consequences. And no, I do not believe in a firey torment...a God of love would never permit that.

[studioDIM]

I would rather live my life knowing that I have an accountability to God rather than science...what is a persons accountability to science? Seems to me that people want to believe in science so that they have no accountability to a supreme being. That way they can live their lives the way that they want without worrying about the consequences. And no, I do not believe in a firey torment...a God of love would never permit that.

You see, i don't think anyone argued about acountability.
Blaise Pascal used a sentence once: "Is it better to bet in the existence of a God, and live like if it was there, or betting on no God existing and live without a though? It surely is better to bet in the existence of One, as if the bet proves wrong, one dies with the knowledge of having lived justly, and can at least take some confort from it, rather than dying after a dissolute life and finding one's self face to face with one."
Science and faith CAN and DO go together, but the mind has to be left open and questioning to the truths of nature.
If that's reading god's book of life, fine.
God made the ruleset:maybe.
And left little or no instructions.
The scope of a scientist has NEVER been to disprove a church or a faith, but to find a COMMENSURABLE way to express what's around him, its laws and its secrets.

Wanted God to forbid certain knowledge, like the Atomic one, he might have just left that part out, and create the lot with a different ruleset, but he didn't.
I COULD make a bad joke here about why he left it in, but i'll restrain.

Should Darwin have found proof of adam and eve, i believe he'd have reported it, bewildered as he might have been.
And wouldn't have ceased discussing his theories , like he did anyways, like Einstein, Leonardo, Galileo.

I see no self-critique of the sacred book, in the posts i read so far, and i honestly cannot relate to such approach to knowledge.
Logic has to hold both ways, as it ALWAYS does in the case of a scientific fact that has been proven.

Even Schroeder's cat is perfectly logical, as it has contour conditions well set, an easy language in the enunciation of the problem, a followable procedure through the solving of the individual conditions, and theorical results which match with ( non )observation.
Its only fault is to have become a tagline too.

Or as strange and convoluted as quantum theory may be to understand in concept, anyone would remember of the public tests with quantum processor core technologies from IBM not a year ago.
And the poor cat would finally retake its place in the "granted" part of knowledge, like sun and earth's positions in space.

In my opinion, faith too has to be driven by a part of unquenchable Logic, as the duty of any faithful is to apply the knowledge and beliefs derived from his faith to the daily life, in such a way as to INTELLIGENTLY adapt to conditions and situations which of necessity were left out of the holy books.

But as (our) Adam well said said, i see swinging arguments, not logic, in these positions, sorry.

Lele

[tdarcy]

Hey Craig,
i'm just wondering if your still watching your THREAD baby grow.......this could rival the 1.5 thread

HEHE.

Where's my glass of red

[beestee]

Science and faith CAN and DO go together, but the mind has to be left open and questioning to the truths of nature.
If that's reading god's book of life, fine.God made the ruleset:maybe.
And left little or no instructions.

Sorry, I had assumed that everyone was aware that we already have an instruction book for life. It is called the Bible, which you had elluded to as "god's book of life" just two short sentences before saying that God "left little or no instructions."

conditions and situations which of necessity were left out of the holy books.

If the condition or situation warrants explanation by God, it is given to us through the Bible.

Would the Bible have application to the discussion we are having right now? Of course.

"Let your utterance be always with graciousness, seasoned with salt, so as to know how you ought to give an answer to each one." - Colossians 4:6

From my point of view, it is my responsibility to let you know what I know, and it becomes your responsibility of whether or not to act on it at that point. I have given Biblical reasoning, scientific reasoning, and even logical illustrations of why I believe what I believe. They have been in accord with the discussion. I have proven my faith to myself already, so there is no need to test it any longer with your scratching and pecking.

I do not consider myself a glutton for punishment, so it is my time to leave this thread to those that are not content.

[visualride]

I am not afraid to tell others that I have confidently filled in the variables in my life, and I am not afraid to tell others how and why I came to those conclusions. There is no mystery in this world for me, and I find myself more content with life knowing that. I don't consider myself as spiritual or clean as I feel that I need to be, and I do not try to come across as self-righteous. I appreciate reason more than anything else in a discussion like this, but a lot of times it just isn't there.

I'll have to chime in with beestee on this one. After growing up in the Bible belt of southern U.S.A., I feel very persecuted by actually having my own beliefs. I don't push them on others, but I sure have had religion pushed on me. When I come across God pushers here in this forum, which feels like home to me while I'm rendering, I feel like pushing back.

Non denominational people, while being a large percentage of the general population aren't visible in this kind of a discussion usually because they are comfortable in them selves, don't feel the need to push their faith, and DO die with a happy conscience.

[studioDIM]

Science and faith CAN and DO go together, but the mind has to be left open and questioning to the truths of nature.
If that's reading god's book of life, fine.God made the ruleset:maybe.
And left little or no instructions.

Sorry, I had assumed that everyone was aware that we already have an instruction book for life. It is called the Bible, which you had elluded to as "god's book of life" just two short sentences before saying that God "left little or no instructions."

Ever read, i don't know, James Joyce's "Ulysses" without at least a couple of books guiding you through the read?
It's some experience, and it shows that there can be a book, and still be unintelligible without instructions.
How does the bible deal with explaining the digestive apparatus of the hudreds of thousands insect species unknown to man to the day?

"Let your utterance be always with graciousness, seasoned with salt, so as to know how you ought to give an answer to each one." - Colossians 4:6

From my point of view, it is my responsibility to let you know what I know, and it becomes your responsibility of whether or not to act on it at that point. I have given Biblical reasoning, scientific reasoning, and even logical illustrations of why I believe what I believe. They have been in accord with the discussion.

Funny how you state your right and method to discussion, and in the same sentence deny i did JUST THE SAME so far.
My knoweldge IS seasoned with the salt of a dozen years of meditation, observation and constant testing of my beliefs, with myself and, herein lies the difference between us,

I have proven my faith to myself already, so there is no need to test it any longer with your scratching and pecking.

with countless others.
No fear, no sin.
Curiosity, of the purest.
The same thing that makes me spend my time reading other people's issues, considering other people's jobs, and generally discussing about anything.

I do not consider myself a glutton for punishment, so it is my time to leave this thread to those that are not content.

Oh, now, this one i really don't understand.
Would it be a SIN to continue discussing?

Lele

[jujubee]

How does the bible deal with explaining the digestive apparatus of the hudreds of thousands insect species unknown to man to the day?

I also have to wonder how Noah stuck all the species into one boat... I don't doubt that there may have been a flood, but to believe this story literally sounds so ridiculous and illogical - I wonder if he grabbed a komodo dragon and a polar bear in his travels then scattered them back all over the world after the floods subsided.

[rpc212]

I also have to wonder how Noah stuck all the species into one boat... I don't doubt that there may have been a flood, but to believe this story literally sounds so ridiculous and illogical - I wonder if he grabbed a komodo dragon and a polar bear in his travels then scattered them back all over the world after the floods subsided.

I also have to wonder how Eve came out of Adams rib. Don't see that happen to often these days!

It also always makes me laugh when some religious people separate us from every other animal on the planet. Ya, we're special and they aren't. Well this is just so we can abuse those "other" animals and justify it. Just like in war. Dehumanize the enemy so they are consciously easier to kill and we don't have to think about the incredible pain and suffering the enemy goes through.

[DaForce]

And not to mention the Koala and the Australian Red Back spider..... please....

I will certainly die with a happy conscience... as long as you enjoy your life and dont do stupid shit like murder someone... you should be all set... no matter what you believe in

[studioDIM]

dah!
DaBalancing of DaForce!

[DaForce]

HAHHAHAHAHAH

watch it

I will smite thee

[RErender]

I also have to wonder how Noah stuck all the species into one boat... I don't doubt that there may have been a flood, but to believe this story literally sounds so ridiculous and illogical - I wonder if he grabbed a komodo dragon and a polar bear in his travels then scattered them back all over the world after the floods subsided.

I also have to wonder how Eve came out of Adams rib. Don't see that happen to often these days!

It also always makes me laugh when some religious people separate us from every other animal on the planet. Ya, we're special and they aren't. Well this is just so we can abuse those "other" animals and justify it. Just like in war. Dehumanize the enemy so they are consciously easier to kill and we don't have to think about the incredible pain and suffering the enemy goes through.

It's because of the Bible that we eat meat?