Ye Religion Thread

[quadz]

You arbitrarily proclaiming that they're the "best minds in history" means nothing to me...

You didn't even read it, did you?  Neil deGrasse Tyson gave specific examples from historical figures who he referred to as the greatest minds in science.

If you want to investigate the origins of humanity as a hobby be my guest, but keep it to yourself until you discover something definitive. 

Plenty of definitive examples were given.  Troll?

The 'great minds' you speak of did not remind everyone of every possible theory in existence...

Utter nonsense.

I suppose you are attempting to demonstrate the technique by which "apathetic fundamentalists will rule the land", by exemplifying a zero-energy form of trolling.

Big deal.

[quadz]

a Nova program airing tonight, entitled The Bible's Buried Secrets
The Bible's Buried Secrets.

Apparently it's an archeological exploration of the first five books of the Bible.

Did anyone else happen to watch this?

I found it to be a fascinating and often compelling presentation of the archaeological research and discoveries illuminating the origin of the Isrealites.  It did get rather speculative at times, like the theorizing about the escaped group of Caananite slaves from Egypt passing through YHW, bringing the YHWH god to the Israelites.

But they did seem to have a fair amount of data pointing to the Israelites themselves having always been descendents of the lower strata Caananite population, who resettled the Caanan highlands after the collapse of the city-state system there.  And a distinct lack of evidence of any mass exodus of Isrealites from Egypt.

I particularly enjoyed the parts where they were able to corroborate specific events depicted in the Bible with other historical accounts, particularly the Egyptian artifacts documenting these events and placing them in a well-established timeline.  (For example, the pillaging of Solomon's temple by king Shishak of Egypt.) 

Interesting stuff.


Regards,

quadz

[ni-ux]

You arbitrarily proclaiming that they're the "best minds in history" means nothing to me...

You didn't even read it, did you?  Neil deGrasse Tyson gave specific examples from historical figures who he referred to as the greatest minds in science.

If you want to investigate the origins of humanity as a hobby be my guest, but keep it to yourself until you discover something definitive. 

Plenty of definitive examples were given.  Troll?

The 'great minds' you speak of did not remind everyone of every possible theory in existence...

Utter nonsense.

I suppose you are attempting to demonstrate the technique by which "apathetic fundamentalists will rule the land", by exemplifying a zero-energy form of trolling.

Big deal.

Why would I read any of your posts?  You have no argument, your little hobby of pretending that you can determine where life came from or pretending that others can determine where life came from is no concern of mine.  You just aren't understanding, its just a hobby, nothing that you should be sharing with people.

Religion causes controversy, hatred, and death.  Find something more productive to be involved with.

[quadz]

Why would I read any of your posts?  You have no argument, your little hobby of pretending that you can determine where life came from or pretending that others can determine where life came from is no concern of mine.  You just aren't understanding, its just a hobby, nothing that you should be sharing with people.

Nihilists! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

[reaper]

I don't see how athiesm isn't a religion, even if you consider it "not playing".

If the prisoners were truly atheists their moral boundires would deteriorate even more.  They all believe in god now, and they get their kicks from killing rapists.  I wouldn't be suprised if they all turned athiests, that they'd be up to even more.

It's like you say you've got a big pile of evidence in the form of evolution, and things should be simple, so there is no god. ridiculous!

[DaHanG]

 

[Whirlingdervish]

Reaper:

there's some simple logic here that you're missing:

religion and belief are not interchangeable.

all religions = a set of beliefs and real world practices based upon them
all beliefs != religions

atheism is a belief that the universe does not have or need a god. it has no practices based upon this belief and needs none.
inaction is not an action (or practice) That is it's very definition. 

The definition of atheism could be described as the process of not using God as a blank check to explain all things that are currently beyond our understanding, because there is no need to do so. (see above posts by quadz)


Ni-ux:

Since you don't actually have a position on this topic and you aren't actually reading anyone's replies, what are you posting here for? Just to make noise?

Do you really have nothing better to do than getting raped at ra2, denying that you're an emo douchebag, and trash talking someone like quadz who apparently went out of his way to explain his position to you in terms that even a retard could understand?

[FYATroll]

You arbitrarily proclaiming that they're the "best minds in history" means nothing to me...

You didn't even read it, did you?  Neil deGrasse Tyson gave specific examples from historical figures who he referred to as the greatest minds in science.

If you want to investigate the origins of humanity as a hobby be my guest, but keep it to yourself until you discover something definitive. 

Plenty of definitive examples were given.  Troll?

The 'great minds' you speak of did not remind everyone of every possible theory in existence...

Utter nonsense.

I suppose you are attempting to demonstrate the technique by which "apathetic fundamentalists will rule the land", by exemplifying a zero-energy form of trolling.

Big deal.

Why would I read any of your posts?  You have no argument, your little hobby of pretending that you can determine where life came from or pretending that others can determine where life came from is no concern of mine.  You just aren't understanding, its just a hobby, nothing that you should be sharing with people.

Religion causes controversy, hatred, and death.  Find something more productive to be involved with.

So the question that comes to mind is, if you think his posts are stupid/boring/uninformative/blah blah blah/etc., then why respond? I mean if you're not going to read the post at all then there is no point in quoting him and then responding. Quadz isn't trying to prove that he knows where and how the universe and everything in it was formed, he's just saying that there might be other options out there that we may not yet know besides the option of God. Personally I dont agree with him, but his posts are very interesting and I read and usually take note even if I dont agree.

BTW, quake 2 is just a hobby...therefore everytime you play the game online you are sharing that hobby...according to you we shouldn't be doing this (for some unknown reason)...so stop playing 

[[BTF]EyEsTrAiN]

"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary; for those who do not, none will suffice." 

[quadz]

I don't see how athiesm isn't a religion, even if you consider it "not playing".

I think Sam Harris broke it down quite nicely in a recent interview.

Well I actually never used the word "athiest" in The End of Faith.
And I never thought to not use it. I simply didn't think of myself as an
athiest. In the same way that I don't think of myself as a non-astrologer.
No one has to wake up in the morning and repudiate astrology by
accepting the identity as a non-astrologer. Virtually no-one believes in
Zeus, and we haven't defined ourself in opposition to paganism.
We're not non-pagans.

And I think it's also useful to point out that every devout
Christian stands in the same relationship to Hinduism or to Islam,
as I do.  Christians look at what's going on in Muslim discourse,
they look at the claim that the Koran is the perfect word of the
creator of the universe, and they are not persuaded. And that's all
my "athiesm" consists of. I'm not persuaded by these patently ridiculous
claims. And I am persuaded by the evidence that these people are part
of a culture that is designed to not look critically at its own
discourse. And so Christians can see that of Islam, they can point out
the errors of thinking there--they just don't point it out in
Christianty.

From my point of view--this is where I may differ from
some of my colleagues--I don't think the word "athiesm" ultimately
is necessary or even useful. And I think it's actually, in the end,
harmful. Because, the rejection of absurdity is much bigger than
athiesm--it is science. Reason is much bigger than athiesm. And,
having standards of evidence and argument is much bigger than
athiesm. And that's all we need to repudiate most of what most
people do most of the time in the name of religion.

Religious faith is really the permission people give one another
to believe things strongly without evidence. And we recognize
that to be pathological in every other area of our lives.

My own view is very close to the above paragraphs.

Sam has been offering that observation as to the questionable usefulness of the term "athiesm" for awhile now.  At first I was sort of ambivalent.  But every time I encounter someone who believes that athiesm is a religion, I'm increasingly persuaded that the term may truly contribute more to obfuscation than clarity.


Regards,

quadz

[QuakeDuke]

"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary; for those who do not, none will suffice." 

Eye! Buddy! Long time, no?

I've heard that before, can you tell me who said it? It's true regardless of which side of discussion you're on.

QD

[reaper]

Sam Harris doesn't believe in god.  To people who do believe in god, athiesm is looked at in a different light.

On a tangent,, the scope of existence and if there is a creator (or not) is well beyond human comprehension.  Certainly at least in the form of connecting the dots through some data we've accumulated.   At least that's my 2 cents, hope you feel free to not believe in other-worldly possibilities.

 


edit, I understand the anger with religion.  Was watching an Aranian woman talk about Iran, and how to approach Islam.  Basically the answer is mitigating religion.  Kind of unforunate.

[[BTF]EyEsTrAiN]

"For those who believe, no explanation is necessary; for those who do not, none will suffice." 

Eye! Buddy! Long time, no?

I've heard that before, can you tell me who said it? It's true regardless of which side of discussion you're on.

QD

QuakeDuke! How goes it man? Hope all is well in your world 

I believe its attributed to Joseph Dunninger, but I've also seen it attributed to Stuart Chase with slightly different wording: "For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible."

[deft]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=200qAsgpfwU

[[BTF]DeathStalker]

I was watching Fox 4 news this morning and they had a small story on the Texas School Board looking to vote on a tough (and in my opinian very stupid) issue.
Talk about someone trying to shove something down someone's throat.
Here's a Blog that i'm quoting here on it from a this news guy.

Life Lesson: Evolution or Else?
Nov 19, 2008 | 8:55 AM PST
Category: News
Featured On: MyFoxDFW

The Texas Board of Education takes on a touchy topic today.  And, ultimately, it will determine: *How to teach children about how life started on this planet.*

Hundreds of science professors say: if we keep doing what we've been doing, then we're hurting our children's chances at succeeding in college and later in life.

Right now-- public schools teach the theory of evolution.  Teachers and students consider the strengths AND weaknesses of the idea (including alternative concepts).  It's been that way for years.  Most board members believe this is the way to go.  New science standards will likely be set for next year.

But-- 95 percent of university level science professors say schools should ONLY teach evolution... forget the alternatives... forget strengths and weaknesses.  A group called the Texas Freedom Network put the study together.

More than 400 (public and private university) professors took the survey.  They say: they believe teaching kids concepts-- other than evolution-- "harms" their college readiness and makes them less able to compete for jobs in the future.

And the study makes sure to mention-- these professors help determine who gets into their schools.

So what should the board of education do? Make sure science teachers stick to the current lesson plan? Or "evolve" science lesson plans into "Evolution Only"? Would that change what you teach your kids at home? Look forward to hearing from you.

And if I understand this corectly

Teaching people anything other than Evolution or teaching it as anything other than pure fact makes them to stupid to get a good job or to go to school ???