Fun with Christian wackos...

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 12 Oct 2009, 13:44

[quote name="Noyka"]

I can be serious because there are claims that science proves everything, in essence it's a god based on evidence supporting a bunch of random theories. Those same random theories are answered by those of faith with "GOD DID IT" there's really not a lot of difference between the two answers.

[/quote]

I really hope you are joking. Lightning: The wrath of God or an electromagnetic phenomenon? They are not equally valid answers. Truth is not relative.

I don't claim to have all the answers(unlike bible thumpers), but I do claim to be closer to an objective truth on the age of the universe, the origin of life, the cause for illnesses(ie: not demons and hobgoblins), et cetera because science relies on observation and experiments. God is not an explanation for anything, any phenomenon in nature that was previously explained with God like lightning will now quite rightly make you embarrass yourself because we now know the real *gasp* OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

Saying God did it is not an equally valid opinion, and is not an idea worthy of respect. That's all we're(I'm) saying. Faith is not a form of reasoning, it's an alternative to reasoning, and shouldn't be encouraged/treated as a virtue, further encouraging ignorance and mis-education(of children, for one, so yes their ignorance is infectious). I will continue to call bullshit whenever necessary, religion has an undeserved status in society where criticizing it has been made taboo. Aren't you against being PC and all that? I am exercising this same principle.

Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm-Flailing Tube Man · 12 Oct 2009, 14:07

The problem is that when adults apologize for religion, they tend to backtrack into the "it's not necessarily literal," "I can't claim to have all the answers and neither can you," etc. line of thinking. In some respects, this is totally valid.

However, religion gets it's teeth by infecting the minds of children - never forget that. It would not exist otherwise. And as children, religion is rarely, if ever, approached from the standpoint of, "oh I dunno, maybe something's out there", it's given to them as an unquestionable absolute. Of course, kids, for the sake of survival, are programmed to take their parents' word as law. So when they've grown to the point where they could think more abstractly, sadly that part of their brain has gone limp. When you combine the rage of an irrational parent with the survival instinct to obey the parent, you create a situation where the child is forced to accept something they know isn't true.

This sends the child's mind to war with itself. Teaching religion to children is abusive and murderous, and the stuff that adolescent suicide is made of.

God is really fear of other people.

If our emotions tell us that we will be attacked for telling the truth – and we have not been telling the truth – it is because we wish to avoid confirmation – i.e. certainty.

If we wish to “avoid” certainty, it is because we are already certain.

Thus it is not really “certainty” that we wish to avoid, but the results of accepting what we already know to be true.

The superstitious cultist who goes to church does not avoid rationally examining the question of the existence of God because he is certain that God exists, but rather because he is certain that God does not exist at all. What he truly wishes to avoid is not the knowledge of God’s nonexistence, but rather the inevitable results of that knowledge, which is the end of his association with his cult, and the inevitable attacks that will descend upon him from his fellow cult members. He also fears the contempt and hostility in his children’s eyes that will inevitably result from his recognition of the truth, since he inflicted his superstition upon them with pious self-righteousness when they were young, helpless and utterly dependent. He is also afraid to put his wife’s love to the test, because he knows exactly what will happen if he says to her: “Will you love me and the truth, or will you reject me out of fear and enslavement to our fellow cultists, if I reject falsehood?

He already knows what her answer will be.

He already knows exactly where he sits on her hierarchy of “values.”

He already knows that his wife will kick him to the curb the moment he speaks the truth.

Thus it is not the absence of God that he fears and avoids, but the consequences of speaking the truth – and the knowledge that he has wasted his life in a squalid, corrupt cult of liars and bullies – and even worse, that he has sacrificed his children’s intelligence and integrity on the altar of his own cowardice.

Truly, to look into the mirror with such accuracy, and to see what he had truly become, would be more than his soul could possibly bear.

Religion is actually analogous to racism in this sense. Not only that it's a form of bigotry against the truth, but a lot of people turn to racism as kids in order to avoid coming face to face with the ugliness of their racist parents. Descending deeper into the mental hell-hole of hateful racism is easier to do than realizing that the people who were supposed to care for you as a kid are actually horrible, cowardly people.

Noyka · Post by **Noyka** » 12 Oct 2009, 14:59

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Noyka"]

I can be serious because there are claims that science proves everything, in essence it's a god based on evidence supporting a bunch of random theories. Those same random theories are answered by those of faith with "GOD DID IT" there's really not a lot of difference between the two answers.

[/quote]

I really hope you are joking. Lightning: The wrath of God or an electromagnetic phenomenon? They are not equally valid answers. Truth is not relative.

I don't claim to have all the answers(unlike bible thumpers), but I do claim to be closer to an objective truth on the age of the universe, the origin of life, the cause for illnesses(ie: not demons and hobgoblins), et cetera because science relies on observation and experiments. God is not an explanation for anything, any phenomenon in nature that was previously explained with God like lightning will now quite rightly make you embarrass yourself because we now know the real *gasp* OBJECTIVE TRUTH.

Saying God did it is not an equally valid opinion, and is not an idea worthy of respect. That's all we're(I'm) saying. Faith is not a form of reasoning, it's an alternative to reasoning, and shouldn't be encouraged/treated as a virtue, further encouraging ignorance and mis-education(of children, for one, so yes their ignorance is infectious). I will continue to call bullshit whenever necessary, religion has an undeserved status in society where criticizing it has been made taboo. Aren't you against being PC and all that? I am exercising this same principle.[/quote]

I'm not joking, they're both answering questions for people there's not a lot of difference. I don't agree with the god answer but to them it is reasoning it is right and it is just and all that jazz. I said I was done attempting to argue/debate for a while because I don't think people are getting I don't neccessarily disagree with the bulk of what either of you are saying. I am just trying to say understand them, don't get all holier than thou

I am against being PC but understanding people's thought processes and the differences in beliefs is important. It's not hurting you if someone chooses to explain evolution and complex cycles like cellular respiration with God is it? It's not. God is a way of rationalizing the mind boggling occurances in our life, similar to what you were saying. I don't see a lack in logic as to why people turn to the belie in God. What I find absolutely mind numbing is people who are so willing to write them off instead of you know actually trying to be human.

Also I am against things that impede on the rights of others. If someone wants to go to mass. thats their right. It is nobody's right to go and interupt that ceremony by dressing up as nuns and making out (two men or two women) and making complete asses of themsevles. There are lines between being "non PC" and just a complete asshole. I know you know that though.

And yes if someone wanted to go worship a chair or some other crazy thing that's their right and as long as they are not inhibiting others rights you have no right to stop the,.

Holocaust · Post by **Holocaust** » 12 Oct 2009, 15:02

[quote name="lez"]People use god to understand complicated matter. It's important to understand their reasoning.[/quote]

Made me think of a cool quote from who the hell knows. "Naming your ignorance 'God' and pretending that, having named it, you have converted ignorance to knowledge is a sorry approach to the unknown."

Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm-Flailing Tube Man · 12 Oct 2009, 15:10

[quote name="Noyka"]And yes if someone wanted to go worship a chair or some other crazy thing that's their right and as long as they are not inhibiting others rights you have no right to stop the,.[/quote]It is, actually, in a roundabout way. No rational human being would do a thing like that. People are naturally skeptical, and to lose that edge requires a lifetime of beatings, humiliation, and frustration.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 12 Oct 2009, 16:31

We're supposed to be the "intelligent" species.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 12 Oct 2009, 18:50

[quote name="Noyka"]

I'm not joking, they're both answering questions for people there's not a lot of difference. I don't agree with the god answer but to them it is reasoning it is right and it is just and all that jazz. I said I was done attempting to argue/debate for a while because I don't think people are getting I don't neccessarily disagree with the bulk of what either of you are saying. I am just trying to say understand them, don't get all holier than thou

[/quote]

What you are doing is bending over backwards and saying it's ok to be ignorant. I bet you aren't equally appeasing towards Muslims who practice female genital mutilation when they try to justify the procedure because it casts out demons or whatever nonsensical reason they have to do that.

Do religious people keep creationism to themselves? No, they try to force it on children to raise a new generation of ignoramuses that some day will have electoral power, and their decisions WILL affect you and me. That and the fact that I believe everyone has the right to a proper education is what really makes me drop any respect for any "alternative science". You'll see a far more immediate effect with Jehova's witnesses and blood transfusions, Catholics and condoms in the third world, Muslims and martyrdom.

People are going to die and have miserable lives because no one is going to call them out on their ignorance, and by being "respectful"(neglectful), we're encouraging this.

[quote name="Noyka"]

What I find absolutely mind numbing is people who are so willing to write them off instead of you know actually trying to be human.

[/quote]

I didn't know being accepting of other people's ignorance, aversion of reason, and intellectual laziness was a part of being human and if it is, it's definitely not one of humanity's virtues.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 12 Oct 2009, 23:41

there is such a thing as scientific fundamentalism. which is just as bad as any other kind of fundamentalism.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 12 Oct 2009, 23:50

[quote name="Teignub"]there is such a thing as scientific fundamentalism. which is just as bad as any other kind of fundamentalism.[/quote]

Yea totally. Like that hard-on bearer who killed all those people in the name of gravity.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 12 Oct 2009, 23:53

no but like those anthropologists who use science as a means to exploit indigenous people

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:05

You know what, I think I'm going to bomb a schoolbus in the name of quantum electrodynamics.

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:07

Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul!

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:11

[quote name="Lavabug"]

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).[/quote]

true but some people dont think that and to deny that many terrible things have happened "in the name of science" is silly.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:13

Grudge · Post by **Grudge** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:13

[quote name="Teignub"]
[quote name="Lavabug"]

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).[/quote]

true but some people dont think that and to deny that many terrible things have happened "in the name of science" is silly.[/quote]

List some other terrible things that have happened in the name of science.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:14

ManOfSteel, what do you think of Dawkins?

Grudge · Post by **Grudge** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:15

I support his atheistic militancy

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:16

Awesome.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:16

[quote name="Teignub"]
[quote name="Lavabug"]

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).[/quote]

true but some people dont think that and to deny that many terrible things have happened "in the name of science" is silly.[/quote]

Vivisection of animals maybe, but the advancement of the core sciences hasn't done harm to anyone. Your quality of life directly depends on it.

Charles Bronson · Post by **Charles Bronson** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:17

Maybe he should have just went to educate liberals.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:19

[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

"There is physics and then there is stamp collecting".

:merechemist:

:lowself-esteem:

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:20

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

"There is physics and then there is stamp collecting".

:merechemist:

:lowself-esteem:[/quote]

"All science is either physics or stamp collecting."

Had that actually typed in the last post, but then changed my mind.

djonni greazo · Post by **djonni greazo** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:21

[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

mathematics would disagree with you

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:22

[quote name="i am the pink lizard"]
[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

mathematics would disagree with you

[/quote]

Math is the language of the cosmos.

1/137. Really, is there any number more awesome than that?

Edit: Btw, I still haven't enrolled this year(classes start in late Oct.), and I can take courses that are common with the physics program. I'm very very very very tempted, I still have time to change!

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:25

[quote name="i am the pink lizard"]
[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

mathematics would disagree with you

[/quote]

I actually have equal time for both Maths and Physics.

Maths isn't a Science though. Maths is arguably the most powerful tool humans ever came up with, along with the Scientific method. It's also more beautiful than any piece of art.

Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm-Flailing Tube Man · 13 Oct 2009, 00:25

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:27

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="i am the pink lizard"]
[quote name="Johnny"]Physics is the greatest of the Sciences. Anyone who doesn't love Physics has no soul![/quote]

mathematics would disagree with you

[/quote]

Math is the language of the cosmos.

1/137. Really, is there any number more awesome than that?

Edit: Btw, I still haven't enrolled this year(classes start in late Oct.), and I can take courses that are common with the physics program. I'm very very very very tempted, I still have time to change![/quote]

What are you studying?

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:29

[youtube]zSZNsIFID28[/youtube]

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:32

Richard Feynman is my hero.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:39

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]
[quote name="Teignub"]
[quote name="Lavabug"]

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).[/quote]

true but some people dont think that and to deny that many terrible things have happened "in the name of science" is silly.[/quote]

List some other terrible things that have happened in the name of science.[/quote]

ok well first off ill preface this with the fact that all these are indigenous issues. its what i study so its what i know. secondly, again, these are mainly anthropology issues and i do see the difference between the social sciences and other sciences, but many people dont. also i dont feel like i need to convince anyone of anything so im not gonna write an essay here.

Biopiracy, or biocolonialism, is a big problem. this is where geneticists, anthropologists, and/or other scientists go into indigenous communities and coerce/trick them into giving blood/skin samples = DNA. They then look through the genetic code to find any differences between them and your average assimilated, mainstream person. If and when they find these differences they then patent that gene. Monsanto is a big culprit in these things. The problems with doing this are huge and varied.

The looting and holding of indigenous ancestral remains is also a problem. Pretty much every University in the U.S. has some indigenous remains in their possession. Most of which is being held against the will of the descendants. The main reason for not returning remains to people who ask is because scientists need to study the remains, "in the name of science," even though it is against the law according to NAGPRA, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, but unfortunately it is not a very well written act and there are many loopholes.

There are more examples, but i sard writing them since i have been awake since 3am and no longer care.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:47

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]
[quote name="Lavabug"]

I think there's a clear difference between anthropology(social science) and the science we're talking about here(physics, chemistry, biology).[/quote]

true but some people dont think that and to deny that many terrible things have happened "in the name of science" is silly.[/quote]

Vivisection of animals maybe, but the advancement of the core sciences hasn't done harm to anyone. Your quality of life directly depends on it.[/quote]

you could make that argument about religion too. the core elements of religion havent hurt anyone. in fact, your quality of life directly depends on it. however, people dont make the distinction between organized religion and the spiritual consciousness inherent to human beings.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:51

[quote name="Teignub"]ok well first off ill preface this with the fact that all these are indigenous issues. its what i study so its what i know. secondly, again, these are mainly anthropology issues and i do see the difference between the social sciences and other sciences, but many people dont. also i dont feel like i need to convince anyone of anything so im not gonna write an essay here.

Biopiracy, or biocolonialism, is a big problem. this is where geneticists, anthropologists, and/or other scientists go into indigenous communities and coerce/trick them into giving blood/skin samples = DNA. They then look through the genetic code to find any differences between them and your average assimilated, mainstream person. If and when they find these differences they then patent that gene. Monsanto is a big culprit in these things. The problems with doing this are huge and varied.

The looting and holding of indigenous ancestral remains is also a problem. Pretty much every University in the U.S. has some indigenous remains in their possession. Most of which is being held against the will of the descendants. The main reason for not returning remains to people who ask is because scientists need to study the remains, "in the name of science," even though it is against the law according to NAGPRA, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, but unfortunately it is not a very well written act and there are many loopholes.

There are more examples, but i sard writing them since i have been awake since 3am and no longer care.[/quote]

Are you remotely aware of the medical advancements(that they themselves would benefit from) that could take place by studying their genes?

Exhuming a few graves and studying remains hardly seems like anything wrong unless it is in fact illegal, sorry but I can't bring myself to feel sorry about this(unless material possessions are actually being stolen).

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:54

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]ok well first off ill preface this with the fact that all these are indigenous issues. its what i study so its what i know. secondly, again, these are mainly anthropology issues and i do see the difference between the social sciences and other sciences, but many people dont. also i dont feel like i need to convince anyone of anything so im not gonna write an essay here.

Biopiracy, or biocolonialism, is a big problem. this is where geneticists, anthropologists, and/or other scientists go into indigenous communities and coerce/trick them into giving blood/skin samples = DNA. They then look through the genetic code to find any differences between them and your average assimilated, mainstream person. If and when they find these differences they then patent that gene. Monsanto is a big culprit in these things. The problems with doing this are huge and varied.

The looting and holding of indigenous ancestral remains is also a problem. Pretty much every University in the U.S. has some indigenous remains in their possession. Most of which is being held against the will of the descendants. The main reason for not returning remains to people who ask is because scientists need to study the remains, "in the name of science," even though it is against the law according to NAGPRA, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, but unfortunately it is not a very well written act and there are many loopholes.

There are more examples, but i sard writing them since i have been awake since 3am and no longer care.[/quote]

Are you remotely aware of the medical advancements(that they themselves would benefit from) that could take place by studying their genes?

Exhuming a few graves and studying remains hardly seems like anything wrong unless it is in fact illegal, sorry but I can't bring myself to feel sorry about this(unless material possessions are actually being stolen).[/quote]

yes i am aware of the medical advancements that could take place, but they HAVENT. until that day, i see no reason to trick people into stealing their blood and PATENTING it, AGAINST THEIR WILL. if you dont see the gigantic problem with that than i have nothing left to say to you.

And its not a "few graves." my small school alone has remains from over 10,000 grave sites. and yes material possessions are actually being stolen. some people are obssessed with Native American "artifacts" and will do anything to get their hands on them.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:56

[quote name="Teignub"]

you could make that argument about religion too. the core elements of religion havent hurt anyone.[/quote]

Have you ever read the bible or Koran? People have and continue to be be put to death because what is written in them. And how does religion improve my quality of life? Should I be grateful that I speak a Latin-derived language because of Post-Constantine Roman imperialism?

[quote name="Teignub"]

yes i am aware of the medical advancements that could take place, but they HAVENT. until that day, i see no reason to trick people into stealing their blood and PATENTING it, AGAINST THEIR WILL. if you dont see the gigantic problem with that than i have nothing left to say to you.

And its not a "few graves." my small school alone has remains from over 10,000 grave sites. and yes material possessions are actually being stolen. some people are obssessed with Native American "artifacts" and will do anything to get their hands on them.[/quote]

Medical advancements don't happen overnight buddy. If they don't want to give their samples it's their choice.

Sorry but you're really making a big deal about nothing at all.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 00:57

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]

you could make that argument about religion too. the core elements of religion havent hurt anyone.[/quote]

Have you ever read the bible or Koran? People have and continue to be be put to death because what is written in them. And how does religion improve my quality of life? Should I be grateful that I speak a Latin-derived language because of Post-Constantine Roman imperialism?[/quote]

you are doing exactly what i just said. you are lumping the inherent spiritual consciousness of human beings with organized religion. and your inherent spiritual consciousness improves the quality of life because it makes you HUMAN.

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:00

[quote name="Teignub"]

you are doing exactly what i just said. you are lumping the inherent spiritual consciousness of human beings with organized religion. and your inherent spiritual consciousness improves the quality of life because it makes you HUMAN.[/quote]

Can you please go into this in detail?

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:01

What do you mean by "spiritual"?

I'm sure you could find a reasonable thing like "awe at the beauty of Nature" or something, and call that spiritual. But you're just redefining the word.

It's like somebody saying the laws of Physics are God. Sure, there's nothing supernatural about that, but you've just redefined the word, and are facilitating confusion.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:12

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]

you are doing exactly what i just said. you are lumping the inherent spiritual consciousness of human beings with organized religion. and your inherent spiritual consciousness improves the quality of life because it makes you HUMAN.[/quote]

Can you please go into this in detail?[/quote]

Sure.

the spiritual consciousness is also what Jung called the collective unconscious mind. it is the layer under the veil of our "waking state." it is something that humans have always had and it is part of what makes us distinct from our primate brethren. timothy leary called it atomic consciousness, the Greeks called it the Logos, Taoists call it the Tao, Terence McKenna called it the Other, and quantum physics has a term for it but that is not my forte so i do not know it. it is what you experience when you are deeply and madly in love, and it is the core element of many, if not all, religions across the planet, even though it has been covered up by many religions through all the bullshit we all know about. its what makes humans human.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:14

That's either needlessly confusing an issue, or is just flat out bullshit, depending on what you mean.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:15

[quote name="Johnny"]What do you mean by "spiritual"?

I'm sure you could find a reasonable thing like "awe at the beauty of Nature" or something, and call that spiritual. But you're just redefining the word.

It's like somebody saying the laws of Physics are God. Sure, there's nothing supernatural about that, but you've just redefined the word, and are facilitating confusion.[/quote]

yes sorry spiritual isnt quite the right term and it is way overused causing it not to really mean anything anymore.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:16

[quote name="Johnny"]That's either needlessly confusing an issue, or is just flat out bullshit, depending on what you mean.[/quote]

yes it is rather confusing, perhaps needlessly so. there are others who have talked about this much more eloquently and in a less confusing manner.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:19

[quote name="Lavabug"]If they don't want to give their samples it's their choice.[/quote]

exactly my point. but this choice is not respected by scientists because they say science is more important than individuals.

did you not see:

[quote name="Teignub"]until that day, i see no reason to trick people into stealing their blood and PATENTING it, AGAINST THEIR WILL[/quote]

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:37

[quote name="Teignub"]
[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]

you are doing exactly what i just said. you are lumping the inherent spiritual consciousness of human beings with organized religion. and your inherent spiritual consciousness improves the quality of life because it makes you HUMAN.[/quote]

Can you please go into this in detail?[/quote]

Sure.

the spiritual consciousness is also what Jung called the collective unconscious mind. it is the layer under the veil of our "waking state." it is something that humans have always had and it is part of what makes us distinct from our primate brethren. timothy leary called it atomic consciousness, the Greeks called it the Logos, Taoists call it the Tao, Terence McKenna called it the Other, and quantum physics has a term for it but that is not my forte so i do not know it. it is what you experience when you are deeply and madly in love, and it is the core element of many, if not all, religions across the planet, even though it has been covered up by many religions through all the bullshit we all know about. its what makes humans human.[/quote]

If you don't know what it is, why are you citing it?

[quote name="Teignub"]

exactly my point. but this choice is not respected by scientists because they say science is more important than individuals.[/quote]

Are patches of skin/hair/blood being yanked off involuntarily off the indigenous people? If not I really don't get how its against anyone's will.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:38

i do know what it is but apparently you dont.

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]exactly my point. but this choice is not respected by scientists because they say science is more important than individuals.[/quote]

Are patches of skin/hair/blood being yanked off involuntarily off the indigenous people? If not I really don't get how its against anyone's will.[/quote]

do you not know what coercion is?

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:44

[quote name="Teignub"]i do know what it is but apparently you dont.

[/quote]

If you knew what you were talking about you wouldn't have such a hard time explaining it in simple, comprehensible terms.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:51

[quote name="Lavabug"]
[quote name="Teignub"]i do know what it is but apparently you dont.

[/quote]

If you knew what you were talking about you wouldn't have such a hard time explaining it in simple, comprehensible terms.[/quote]

some complex questions need complex answers. explain quantum entanglement in simple, comprehensible terms. explain chaos theory in simple, comprehensible terms.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:55

Obfuscation concealing ignorance.

Teignub · Post by **Teignub** » 13 Oct 2009, 01:58

Pseudointellectualism concealing ignorance.

exactly what am i being ignorant of?

Lavabug · Post by **Lavabug** » 13 Oct 2009, 02:01

[quote name="Teignub"]

yes it is rather confusing, perhaps needlessly so. there are others who have talked about this much more eloquently and in a less confusing manner.[/quote]

Which doesn't eliminate the possibility that it's flat-out bullshit with obfuscatory language to impress people and give the false impression that its something meaningful.

[quote name="Teignub"]

some complex questions need complex answers. explain quantum entanglement in simple, comprehensible terms. explain chaos theory in simple, comprehensible terms.[/quote]

I'm not a physicist, so I'm not going to pretend I can answer those questions faithfully(I think I could explain the latter though), but they can be demonstrated experimentally. They could be explained in simple terms, but it would require some previous (probably extensive) knowledge in physics. Richard Feynman(video I posted) has a knack at explaining complicated physics subjects with laymen vocabulary, and in fact always said if you couldn't explain it in simple terms, you didn't understand it at all.

"Spirituality" I'm sure you will say is exempt from experimental demonstration. To me that just means its nonsense.

Verbal · Post by **Verbal** » 13 Oct 2009, 02:02

[quote name="Teignub"]Pseudointellectualism concealing ignorance.

exactly what am i being ignorant of?[/quote]

I wasn't referring to you specifically. I agree with Lavabug. If you can't break something down and explain it to a person of average intelligence, you don't understand it. Sure some things may take a while. But they can be built up.