The Strange and Interesting Thread

[quadz]

Fucking hell, Alpha. Are you trolling? Or just home-schooled?

[|iR|Focalor]

If everyone voted to suspend the law of gravity, it doesn't mean gravity will stop does it?

No, not in America. In America, voting is pointless. If you want to stop gravity in America, you have to be a member of the electoral college. In America, our government is hard at work dazzling us with confusing bullshit and finding new exciting ways to be totally ineffective. We like shit that way.

Anyway...

Life doesn't come from dead things? Well if you kill someone in a house that's free of roaches and flies and other common pests, then leave the dead body laying there, in about a month or two you're gonna have a whole shitload of maggots and flies in the room with that dead body. There won't be any holes in the floor where the maggots tunneled up to get to it, no windows will be open to have let flies in, etc. Hmmm, I guess God waved his magic wand and poofed all the dead-people-bugs in that room to show us his awesome power. PRAISE THE LORD, IT'S A MIRACLE!

There's really only one Creationist view that doesn't make me roll my eyes, and that would be the whole clockmaker analogy that people like Newton, Voltaire, and Descartes. Because it at least kinda-sorta tries to look at it from a standpoint of logic. They acknowledge that apparently there's nobody up there giving a single shit about what happens in daily life right now (which is one really fucking keen observation there, dude - cuz this place is pretty fucked), but it still postulates that all the shit that makes up this planet is just too complex to have begun by random chance. Dumb... but I'll give 'em credit for at least peeking outside the box just a tad.

[Barton]

Alpha: All matter cannot be created or destroyed (law of conversation of mass), so all of the matter that exists in the universe must of be tightly packed at a single point (singularity) before the explosion occurred. After that explosion, matter was distributed throughout the universe. Once matter cooled down enough by inflation (rapid expansion of the universe), gasses were able to form in order to build stars, galaxies, planets, and other celestial bodies. That is at least my understanding of the Big Bang.

The idea how life was created in the universe comes from biogenesis. It is the theory that life evolved from non-living things. A classic experiment that is a step in the right direction to uncover how single celled organisms were created, is with the Miller and Urey experiment, it was proven that amino acids, sugars and bases could be formed in Earth's early atmospheric conditions. All of those are organic molecules that found in DNA.

[Barton]

I can understand Alpha's point of view, however. There are definitely some issues that come up when you consider the Big Bang theory. Like how scientists at the moment cannot tell us what were the initial conditions before the explosion happened. They can only tell us in an infinitesimally small fraction of a second what happened after the explosion. This is troubling if you are looking for a complete answer of how the universe was created, from the Big Bang theory. That's where your question comes up, Alpha. Where did all of this matter come from? They don't have an answer yet. I think a few physicists are troubled enough by this question to believe in stupid things like the multiverse, the idea that our universe was created from the collusion of two other universes. I can agree with the idea of multiverse on philosophical level, but objectively you cannot believe in such a thing since it is impossible to observe anything that is outside of our own universe.

[Whirlingdervish]

here's an example of what I was talking about:

[04:39] <uvula> (dm) YahshuaIsLord!: God exists!
[04:39] <uvula> (dm) YahshuaIsLord!: creation proves it

<snip> Sure, Christians can be moral. <snip>

I'm not sure that's even true. How moral can someone actually be when they've abdicated all responsibility for moral behavior by putting all of the hard choices off on God?

Truly moral behavior to me, would be behaving in a "good" or "productive" way because YOU chose to do so for the good of your peer group/family/society, not because of your fear of God or Hell or whatever other scare tactic that religions used to force you to do so.

It seems to me that only without God can a person truly live a moral lifestyle.

[Sgt. Dick]

it is impossible to observe anything that is outside of our own universe.

This must be what it is like to be 2dum.  In his world, he has delusions of greatness.  In reality, he is no more than a spec on the ass of the top players.

[Alpha]

A lot of talking on morals. I like to kill and rape babies. Everyone here thinks morals are relative so no one dare respond saying raping and killing babies is wrong because where i come from its perfectly fine. morals are relative right?

[quadz]

everyone is religious. Doesn't matter if you believe in a creator or are an atheist, you are still religious.

religion- a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

Atheism is a lack of belief.

Science follows where evidence leads.

Both of these point away from faith and religious dogma.

Alpha: Update your mental database with new information. Don't be a Tubby.

I would also like to add the big bang theory has never sounded right to me. Bill nye says the big bang was caused by an explosion that was caused by nothing that created atoms that came from nowhere.

The physics of the very large, the very small, and the very high energy, all run contrary to our primate intuition.

It's never going to "sound right" to a primate, if that primate takes zero interest in what we've learned over the past 100+ years.  (Recall that the behavior of particles at a quantum level doesn't "sound right" either.)

Humans evolved over millions of years from raining on a rock for millions of years.

That to me sounds very dumb yet is taught in school as being the truth.

Alpha, please file a complaint against your Junior High School biology teacher for gross negligence and dereliction of duty.

Evolution is not true, never was, has never been proven to be true, has not been observed in todays era.

Very funny, Tubby.

Evolution has been observed directly in the lab, as well as in several modern species.

Evolution underpins modern biology.

Fossil record evidence produces an evolutionary tree of life.

Genetic analysis also produces an evolutionary tree.

Both trees match up.

Further, we understand the chemical mechanisms by which evolution by natural selection functions.

Evolution is fact, to the strongest degree possible in science.

Alpha: Please update your mental database with new information. Whoever filled your brain with such a complete blanket of lies should probably be brought up on child abuse charges.

Life coming from non life? never in human history has this been observed...EVER. I have never seen life come from non life have you?

Abiogenesis is a fascinating frontier.

A lot of talking on morals. I like to kill and rape babies. Everyone here thinks morals are reletive so one dare respond saying raping and killing babies is wrong because whrre i come from its perfectlly fine. morals are reletive rigt?

Is slavery moral?

Keep in mind the God of the Bible condones slavery, both in the Old and New Testament.

The New Testament even states that Christians can be slave masters, and that slaves should show their Christian masters special devotion.

So is slavery moral, just because God condones it?

Or has your morality changed with the times, relative to what was considered moral in Biblical times?

[Alpha]

Atheism is a lack of belief.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religion

Atheism is a belief that there is no god. So that in itself is a belief system. Do Atheists believe in the big bang? some do, some don't, some believe in nothing, however if you try and tell me that there is no god, that is your belief system that you are trying to impose on someone who believes in a creator isn't it? So yes it is a belief. And just on that note I did not come up with the definition of what religion means, That is what the dictionary says it means.

Humans evolved over millions of years from raining on a rock for millions of years.

This is what scientist like bill nye "the science guy" actually believe

Evolution has been observed directly in the lab, as well as in several modern species.

Kinds come from kinds. You wont get a dog from a pig. You can have many kinds that produce different kinds like dogs. there are many kinds of dog, but they all had a common ancestor....you guessed it a dog!

Abiogenesis is a fascinating frontier.

Just another theory that has yet to produce any results. People are always trying to find new things to run from the possibility that there is an actual creator

Is slavery moral?

your question assumes you actually know the meaning of the word it was translated from in the hebrew.

The term “slave” in Ephesians 6:5 is better translated “bondservant.”

This is often misconstrued as an endorsement of harsh slavery, which it is not. God listed slave traders among the worst of sinners in 1 Timothy 1:10 (“kidnappers/men stealers/slave traders”). This is no new teaching, as Moses was not fond of forced slavery either:

   He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 21:16)

[Alpha]

Also just a side note on evolution. This is bill nye "the science guy". scientist pin up boy of the day teaching evolution. Inside the first 10 seconds "molecules just happen". really? very scientific indeed


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGRRXKek8G0

[quadz]

Also just a side note on evolution. This is bill nye "the science guy". scientist pin up boy of the day teaching evolution. Inside the first 10 seconds "molecules just happen". really? very scientific indeed


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGRRXKek8G0

Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer, not a biologist, chemist, or particle physicist.  Nevertheless, "molecules just happen" is a completely reasonable statement about chemistry.

Molecules are formed when atoms bond by sharing electrons in their outer shells.

Some atoms are better at forming bonds than others. Carbon is amazingly promiscuous.

Molecules indeed "just happen" because that is what atoms do naturally when they socialize at parties.

Atheism is a belief that there is no god. So that in itself is a belief system.

Wrong again.

I presume you yourself are an a-fairyist with regard to your neighbor's claim that invisible fairies live under the mushrooms in her garden. Your disinclination to accept her evidence-free claim about invisible fairies does not constitute a system of belief on your part.

Please update your mental database with new information.

Do Atheists believe in the big bang? some do, some don't, some believe in nothing, however if you try and tell me that there is no god, that is your belief system that you are trying to impose on someone who believes in a creator isn't it? So yes it is a belief.

Wrong again.

(1.) Scientists don't 'believe' in the big bang. Language can be sloppy and sometimes people employ the term 'believe' in situations where it isn't appropriate (similar to the way people can incorrectly mix the casual definition of theory vs. the scientific meaning.) The Scientific Method produces its results without requiring belief. Scientists accept that the Big Bang theory is likely to be true, because that's where multiple lines of evidence lead, and because the theory has been shown to have strong predictive power. Belief doesn't enter into it. Further, if a new theory were to be developed that could supersede the Big Bang theory, in the way that Newton was superseded by Einstein, then we will have learned something new, which is great. But what is needed for that to occur will be evidence, not belief.

(2.) It's not valid scientifically to "tell you there is no god." What is scientific, is to require you to provide evidence to support your god-hypothesis. No belief required on this end.

Please update your mental database with new information.

Humans evolved over millions of years from raining on a rock for millions of years.

This is what scientist like bill nye "the science guy" actually believe

Only in the sense that Australia is entirely peopled with criminals.

You've left out some important details there, sport.

Kinds come from kinds. You wont get a dog from a pig. You can have many kinds that produce different kinds like dogs. there are many kinds of dog, but they all had a common ancestor....you guessed it a dog!

That's not where the evidence leads.



Please learn the difference.

The chemical processes which govern the engine of biological reproduction and genetic inheritance and mutation, have no information about speciation. They merely produce gradual change.

Your "kinds" hypothesis is not only unsupported by evidence, it is contradicted by the chemical process of biology.

Please update your mental database with new information.

Moses was not fond of forced slavery either:

   He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 21:16)

That passage appears concerned with the punishment for kidnapping:

If you kidnap someone and it is found that (a) you sold the victim; or (b) you still have the victim on hand; then either way it states you get the same punishment. (Unless you're suggesting the kidnapping part was never a crime, so long as you didn't enslave the victim.)

In any case:

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you.  You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land.  You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance.  You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.  (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are.  If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.  But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her.  And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter.  If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife.  If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.  (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished.  If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.  (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

"Slavery! It's legit." -- God.

[Alpha]

Scientists don't 'believe' in the big bang

They don't huh? Then why do they spend millions of dollars keeping it in the public schools text books? If it's just a theory and these people don't "believe" in it then why go through so much trouble to force feed it to kids as what really happened?

What is scientific, is to require you to provide evidence to support your god-hypothesis.

I have already provided you with ample evidence. Show me anywhere in the world where a scientist in any lab has produced life from non life. Show me experiments where something comes out of thin air from nothing. Show me anywhere, where an explosion makes things evolve. It;s never happened in any science room i know of.

Jesus was an historical figure, you have eye witnesses, you have the dead sea scrolls (historical documentation) as well as documentation from even the secular circles to say jesus was a real historical figure.

How do we know abraham lincoln is real? We have eye witnesses, we have hisotircal documentation the very same evidence jesus was real

Only in the sense that Australia is entirely peopled with criminals.

What does that have to do with the price of fish? If that was meant as a personal insult to me, it shows me you have to resort to that because you can't so easily explain things away. Im trying to have a reasonable debate about this. However if you want to go down that path, you would have to be pretty daft not to see that their are criminals anywhere you go in the world. I hear the crime rate in the USA isn't so flash there either bucko.

Your "kinds" hypothesis is not only unsupported by evidence, it is contradicted by the chemical process of biology.

Really? I actually studied biology in school. And I can tell you right now there is no way known that a cat will ever give birth to a new "species" just like every other animal on this planet. A kind will produce a like kind, but never a whole new species.

That passage appears concerned with the punishment for kidnapping

If you have actually read the bible and fully understand it, which i doubt you have and do, You will come to find things that people try and use to say "oh look your god is a cruel god" is actually wrong, taken out of context twisted ect ect. If you want to read what the bible actually teaches about slavery, I recommend you read here https://answersingenesis.org/bible-questions/doesnt-the-bible-support-slavery/

[|iR|Focalor]

A lot of talking on morals. I like to kill and rape babies. Everyone here thinks morals are relative so no one dare respond saying raping and killing babies is wrong because where i come from its perfectly fine. morals are relative right?

First of all... DUDE. Even if it's completely hypothetical for the purpose of having this argument, it's never a good idea to put words like "I" and "baby rape" together on the internet with your name on it. 

Uh, yeah, that was... what it was.

Continuing now, switching topics.

Um. *cough* Morals kinda are relative.

Relative to a lot of humans, killing humans is "wrong". But relative to this planet as a being in and of itself, killing humans... nothing wrong with it. Volcanoes do it. Tornadoes do it. Wild animals do it. Microscopic diseases do it. If God created this world, and one of his 10 laws is that killing people is unholy and wrong, then he sure did a piss poor job of making sure everything that ISN'T a person knows about it.

Relative to guys outside of prison, assfucking other dudes makes you a flaming Liberace homo. Relative to guys inside of prison, assfucking other dudes... not really a problem anymore. Neither is killing someone for pissing on the toilet seat or talking without permission in the presence of certain inmates.

Relative to people in America, cutting a persons head off in broad daylight in front of lots of people is horrible and wrong. Relative to people living in Saudi Arabia, cutting a persons head off in the middle of the street for committing some "crime" (a crime which is relative to that part of the world) is totally common and not a big deal at all. People don't freak out and run around in circles screaming about it... they just shrug and keep walking.

Morals, relative to the universe as a whole, don't exist at all and have no meaning and no consideration are given to them. It's only here on this planet amongst the human animals that live on it that "morals" have any meaning. It's only because we give them meaning and purpose that they have any meaning and purpose. As a whole, these days humans tend to consider anything oppressive or forceful to be immoral. Murdering someone forces them to die and experience the pain of becoming mortally injured when they don't want to die or suffer pain. Raping someone forces them to get fucked by you when they don't want you fucking them. Most of us across all cultures that might have differing customs can tend to agree that the proposition of being murdered or raped is not a satisfying thought, which is precisely why most all cultures consider murder and rape to be "bad" and "criminal". Thus, morals are born.

And morals can be suspended and become relative to the situation. Murder and rape is "bad" and "criminal" all day everyday in Russia. But during war, murdering the other guy is no problem at all. It's your fucking duty during war. And the Russians did their duty like crazy in the latter half of World War 2 as they killed lots and lots of Germans and raped the shit out of tons of German women and girls as they moved closer and closer to Berlin. At home before the war, they didn't go around raping and killing people all over their neighborhoods. But relative to what was going on during that war... they had no problem with HELPING one another rape any damn woman they came across. In the microcosm of that small time period in which they suited up for war in Germany, holding down some woman while his buddy fucked the shit out of her lost it's criminality and wrongness. Relative to the rest of the world who wasn't standing right there in their shoes doing it, it was still wrong and criminal though.

Simple fact, your initial statement, as ridiculous as it is, is absolutely true. Morals are entirely relative because they don't really exist anyway. In a society where such things exist, murder might be okay. In a society where it doesn't, like both of ours, it's not okay. And the only reason it becomes wrong in that other society is because our societies exist to decry and oppose it. But if you wipe out both our societies which oppose murder with a viral epidemic and leave the one that doesn't oppose murder completely intact and unharmed by the epidemic, and POOF, suddenly murder becomes universally a-okay because those people are the only ones left to have an opinion about it.

[Alpha]

Relative to a lot of humans, killing humans is "wrong". But relative to this planet as a being in and of itself, killing humans... nothing wrong with it. Volcanoes do it. Tornadoes do it. Wild animals do it. Microscopic diseases do it. If God created this world, and one of his 10 laws is that killing people is unholy and wrong, then he sure did a piss poor job of making sure everything that ISN'T a person knows about it.

Firstly to correct you, At the end of GOD's creative acts on the sixth day, God “saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).

To have been very good, God’s creation must have been without blemish, defect, disease, suffering, or death. There was no “survival of the fittest.” Animals did not prey on each other, and the first two humans, Adam and Eve, did not kill animals for food. The original creation was a beautiful place, full of life and joy in the presence of the Creator.

Both humans and animals were vegetarians at the time of creation. In Genesis 1:29–30 the Lord said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food.”

This passage shows clearly that in God’s very good creation, animals did not eat each other (and thus, there was no animal death), as God gave Adam, Eve, and the animals only plants to eat. (It was was not until after the worldwide Flood of Noah’s Day—1,600 years later—that man was allowed to eat meat, according to Genesis 9:3.)

After adam and eve ate from the tree of knowledge, god cursed them for their disobedience...

Genesis 3 also reveals that the ground was cursed. Thorns and thistles were now part of the world. Animals were cursed, the serpent more than the rest. The world was no longer perfect but sin-cursed. Suffering and death now abounded in that once-perfect creation.


Now that that has been corrected, let's get back to morals. If your state was to pass a law tomorrow allowing you to kill and rape anyone you so wished, could you live it out? could you actually live out doing something like that? Or would you feel bad for even thinking about doing it? Better still lets say you went through with it, would you feel guilty afterwards? would you feel bad within yourself? Even better again, you were forced to watch your wife and child get raped right in front of your eyes powerless to stop it, you wouldn't get angry and mad right because morals are all relative and the law says its ok to do so. You see if morals are all relative, you possibly could rape and murder without feeling guilty, but something tells me that you wouldn't actually be able to live it out, and live it out without feeling guilty, or get extremely pissed of if you saw a loved one get raped or killed in front of your eyes.

[|iR|Focalor]

Relative to a lot of humans, killing humans is "wrong". But relative to this planet as a being in and of itself, killing humans... nothing wrong with it. Volcanoes do it. Tornadoes do it. Wild animals do it. Microscopic diseases do it. If God created this world, and one of his 10 laws is that killing people is unholy and wrong, then he sure did a piss poor job of making sure everything that ISN'T a person knows about it.

Firstly to correct you, At the end of GOD's creative acts on the sixth day, God “saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).

To have been very good, God’s creation must have been without blemish, defect, disease, suffering, or death. There was no “survival of the fittest.” Animals did not prey on each other, and the first two humans, Adam and Eve, did not kill animals for food. The original creation was a beautiful place, full of life and joy in the presence of the Creator.

Both humans and animals were vegetarians at the time of creation. In Genesis 1:29–30 the Lord said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food.”

This passage shows clearly that in God’s very good creation, animals did not eat each other (and thus, there was no animal death), as God gave Adam, Eve, and the animals only plants to eat. (It was was not until after the worldwide Flood of Noah’s Day—1,600 years later—that man was allowed to eat meat, according to Genesis 9:3.)

After adam and eve ate from the tree of knowledge, god cursed them for their disobedience...

Genesis 3 also reveals that the ground was cursed. Thorns and thistles were now part of the world. Animals were cursed, the serpent more than the rest. The world was no longer perfect but sin-cursed. Suffering and death now abounded in that once-perfect creation.

Cool. That's really informative. But unfortunately not a word of it is true. Not a word of it is proven. Every word of it is total fantasy make believe bullshit... relative to my belief that I want to see conclusive evidence before I say something is true.

Don't you think it's a little crazy how your "logic" works here? You think the big bang is bullshit, you think that life cannot come from "nothing" and that evolution hasn't been proven... yet you still believe that some invisible old man in the sky can make life from nothing and the only proof you need is words on a page. Why don't you hold the idea of God to the same standard that you hold the big bang theory, evolution, etc? Why are the words in THAT book true and words in another book like the Quran not true? Have you seen some kind of evidence to prove one over the other? Since both of them are made up bullshit, I'm gonna say you haven't seen anything. It's just that your parents and grandparents and their parents all read from that particular book. It's just family tradition, and traditions are all relative too.

So you see, morals are as relative as a persons faith in a religion. You believe God created the world and Jesus was his son. Relative to your beliefs, Islam's belief that Allah created the world and Muhammed was his special little messenger is complete bullshit. Relative to Islam's set of beliefs, YOUR God is bullshit. Relative to most people, murder is bad and you shouldn't do it. Relative to a sociopath, murder is okay if they feel they have a good enough reason for it and it's just a thing they might do in the course of a day in a long list of things... cooking breakfast, taking the dog for a walk, smoking a cigarette, taking a shit, washing the car... bashing someones skull open with a pipe wrench because they had some money that I wanted.

Now that that has been corrected, let's get back to morals. If your state was to pass a law tomorrow allowing you to kill and rape anyone you so wished, could you live it out? could you actually live out doing something like that? Or would you feel bad for even thinking about doing it? Better still lets say you went through with it, would you feel guilty afterwards? would you feel bad within yourself? Even better again, you were forced to watch your wife and child get raped right in front of your eyes powerless to stop it, you wouldn't get angry and mad right because morals are all relative and the law says its ok to do so. You see if morals are all relative, you possibly could rape and murder without feeling guilty, but something tells me that you wouldn't actually be able to live it out, and live it out without feeling guilty, or get extremely pissed of if you saw a loved one get raped or killed in front of your eyes.

Just like the Bible, these hypothetical laws that are gonna be passed to make murder legal aren't real and don't matter and are complete bullshit. Never gonna happen. Nothing to debate there. Because relative to the society I live in, too many people consider murder to be an asshole thing to do, and they'd never stand for a law that would legalize it.

Could I rape someone? Could I kill someone? Fuck yes. I have the ability to do it. Could I do it for no reason at all? No. I need a good reason to do ANYTHING I do. Call me lazy, but I'm not about to put forth the tremendous effort it takes to kill someone without having a damn good reason first. But if I had good reason to do it, sure, I could and would kill the shit out of someone, no problemo. I wouldn't feel bad at all about it, I'd sleep like a baby, but only because I had a good reason. Then again, I'm a bit of a sociopath myself, so using me as an example of a "normal" person in relation to your argument is pretty pointless.

Furthermore, I think it's pretty ironic that you arrived at this "analogy" about my family getting raped and murdered in front of me right after we were all saying what a complete dumbass Phil Robertson was for saying what he said... which was pretty much the same thing.