Ye Religion Thread

[DaHanG]

We should also have a word count for "incomprehensible". There should be a limit so we can detect those with broken-record syndrome.

 

[metaL]

deft, i am a registered democrat, but i'd say i'm definitely moderate, and actually more conservative than liberal.  I registered as a democrat because i believe the democrats are likely to win more often than the republicans, and this way i can vote in the democratic primary.  You can laugh at my opinion of global warming, but i really think it exists.  I also think Exxon wouldnt have paid scientists 10 grand a piece to come up with evidence that made global warming seem like a hoax, if they really didnt see it as a threat.  And yes, i was a biology major 

[reaper]

We should also have a word count for "incomprehensible". There should be a limit so we can detect those with broken-record syndrome.

wouldn't you think something simple would exist forever, and not something extremley complex?

[DaHanG]

I agree, I have a hard time understanding entities that don't exist.

[reaper]

I agree, I have a hard time understanding entities that don't exist.

you never know : )

[DaHanG]

if say there is only one big bang, and there a one in a trillion trillion trillion chance you get a universe that supports life, would you believe in an accident like that ?

I wouldn't call that an accident. Accidents are usually associated with bad things.

One in a trillion trillion trillion chance? Interesting conclusion.

[ni-ux]

deft, i am a registered democrat, but i'd say i'm definitely moderate, and actually more conservative than liberal.  I registered as a democrat because i believe the democrats are likely to win more often than the republicans, and this way i can vote in the democratic primary.  You can laugh at my opinion of global warming, but i really think it exists.  I also think Exxon wouldnt have paid scientists 10 grand a piece to come up with evidence that made global warming seem like a hoax, if they really didnt see it as a threat.  And yes, i was a biology major 

What?

You fucking moron, you're basically saying "I'm a democrat because democrats win".

Which is the same as saying: "Since I'm stupid and don't understand politics, I prefer to pretend I'm aligned with the winning side"

[deft]

lol niux.

Democrat..conservative..same thing with global warming.  There is NO evidence of global warming, it's all political bullshit.  One thousand years ago it was warmer.  Do you know how many farms and homes that were built in Greenland are now covered by ice?  And as far as Al Gore goes with his polar bear shit, that species has increased by over 20,000.  He posts a picture of a polar bear floating on a piece of ice and people believe it, along with his hockey stick graph of global warming which is complete bullshit.  If you're interested in anything, I could post some links to read.

[Whirlingdervish]

please do.. we've a shortage of reading material on that subject posted in the thread so far, and I think it would be useful if we were all on the same page..

 

[reaper]

Democrat..conservative..same thing with global warming.

[metaL]

What?

You fucking moron, you're basically saying "I'm a democrat because democrats win".

Which is the same as saying: "Since I'm stupid and don't understand politics, I prefer to pretend I'm aligned with the winning side"

lol, how come I am not surprised. its a simple prediction that many people make which will give me more voting power.  Here's an example, If you were a registered republican always voted conservative, but 80% of your state voted democrat, your vote for a republican wouldnt be doing much good now would it? But, if you were a registered democrat, you will at least be able to vote for which democratic candidate whom you thought would be "the lesser of two evils".

This does not represent my situation, nor do i dislike the democrats (in fact i didnt even vote in the bush/kerry election, i did not feel strongly for either candidate, and i am not one of those people that vote just to say you did) but it does show the general idea behind this.. lol

Deft, its my opinion that global warming should not bet ignored.  It may not pose a huge threat to us presently, but this is not the kind of thing that should be neglected until it does.  And Al Gore? he's a bitch anyways, if he was really passionate about the whole global warming cause, he would have mentioned it in his campaign.. but he knew that would basically be political suicide, as far as the election was concerned.

[haunted]

There is NO evidence of global warming, it's all political bullshit.

It is very possible that global warming is not the issue that advocates for it present it to be as. It's possibly the least of our worries globally. However, it is FACT that this possibility has a near 10% chance of being true. Maybe by saying 'there is no evidence of global warming' you meant to say that it is not the threat that it is publicized as, or maybe you know about as much about global warming as this man right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1wogkDmLlQ

Besides the fact that earth is the warmest it has been in thousands of years, maps are being changed due to the melting of anarctica and greenland, many places are breaking all-time high temperature records, and the ride in temperature is directly proportional to the rise in carbon emissions, I will get a little more specific with the evidence.

"Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide have increased
markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values
determined from ice cores spanning many thousands of years (see Figure SPM-1). The global increases
in carbon dioxide concentration are due primarily to fossil fuel use and land-use change, while those of
methane and nitrous oxide are primarily due to agriculture. {2.3, 6.4, 7.3}

Carbon dioxide is the most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas (see Figure SPM-2). The global
atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 ppm to
379 ppm3 in 2005. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range
over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores. The annual carbon dioxide
concentration growth-rate was larger during the last 10 years (1995

[DaHanG]

not to mention up to 1940 it was warming

.2 degrees difference in 40 years (1900-1940). Wow it was warming so quickly back then! It has warmed before naturally therefore humans have no impact. Problem solved.

i just threw out a number based on hawking saying:  a life supporting universe is extremley unlikely to form.  we are trying to understand more about what happens in the beggining, but it's my theory the former will still be true (if there is only one big bang).

And I can "just throw out a number" on how statistically improbable an all-powerful all-knowing intelligence was "just there" or "created naturally". It doesn't mean that number is in the slightest bit representative. 

[reaper]

.2 degrees difference in 40 years (1900-1940). Wow it was warming so quickly back then! It has warmed before naturally therefore humans have no impact. Problem solved.

global warming is a theory based on assumptions and bad data.

[DaHanG]

.2 degrees difference in 40 years (1900-1940). Wow it was warming so quickly back then! It has warmed before naturally therefore humans have no impact. Problem solved.

global warming is a theory based on assumptions and bad data.  people makes claims it exists but there is no supporting evidence.  the temperature increased naturally before humans were producing the large amounts of greenhouse gases we do today,  yet the exponential increase in greenhouse gases is not correlating with temperature. as late as 1995 the temperature data didnt account for heat generated by cities, do you realize how much something like this scews results.  I do know generally about the false veracity of the IPCC claims, and if i was shown their evidence hopefully I could show you/everyone it's wrong.  global warming was a theory of assumptions and it's predictions aren't adding up.

This will be at least the 3rd time I