Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Ok ... Time to engage

I knew this was a pointless game from step 1.

You were offered statements consistent with alternative viepoints and, per "DA's scientific method" you level not on alternative views but argue that alternative theories will not be accepted by you if religion gets to peek.

You avoid the rest of the scientific theories because it upsets you to see such a "holy" presentation of science present offerings.

It's OK DA. I should not have accepted your "test", even in fun.
JJW

I am not playing games here. What I am doing is subjecting you to what is called critical thinking.

Science, and the scientific method, are based upon a couple of very simple premises. One of these premises is that physics is the same for all observers. Gravity does not affect Christians differently than atheists.The melting point of water ice is not subject to the belief system of the observer.

Your second statement:
"I see a large space beyond measure all of which is subject to God?s will."
is by definition going to produce different answers depending on the observer. An Earth man and a Martian will agree on the index of refraction of a diamond. You can not obtain an agreement between an atheist and deist that anything is subject to God's will.

Thus your second statement is based on theology and faith ... not science. Are you incapable of seeing the difference?

DA you are missing the point.

The "difference", IS the point.

jjw

jjw004 wrote:
"The "difference", IS the point."

Q: Why does a mouse when it spins?
A: Because the higher the fewer!

Your statement and mine ... equally meaningful. There is no point in what you wrote. Just words strung together in a fashion emulating a sentence.

Mr Morgan. All thinking is subject to pre-existing values held in the head of the thinker. Value free critical thinking is illusory whether it is performed by philosophers, theologians, scientists or drug addicts. Each thought is filtered through a whole maze of hard wired perceptions and assumptions. Your thinking may be more reliable when it comes to hard science...as it is testable, but still not 100% trustworthy. When you stroll into the realm of philosophy and theology you join hands with rest of the crack addicts whos underlying drives, fears and desires drive them to rationalise what they're doing. It's the humble of thought who will bring progress. It's the opinionated that we should fear. No dictator has kicked off genocide by stating..."Now I may well be mistaken about this but...".

Easy.

Easy Life wrote:
"Mr Morgan. All thinking is subject to pre-existing values held in the head of the thinker."

Mr. Easy. All communication requires that all parties to the communication understand it.

You are correct that the realm of philosophy and theology runs by different rules. Though I wouldn't go so far as to label all of them crack addicts. But the last time I checked the URL was scienceagogo.com not lookattheprettycolors.com

Morgan.. are you telling people how to define/use scientific method, post some of your writings, give us some EXAMPLE on how YOU conduct scientific study(s) .. should we look at the surgery and prayer "STUDY" that you deemed scientific and pure, beyond questionable?? ROFLMAO.. stop, my ribs hurt!

DA, I will get a little serious for a moment.

I am not some dummy that is serious about your beliefs, or gives a damn about your beliefs. It is your constant bombardment of other people?s views that gets me involved with your postings.

The major difference between us is that I view and tolerate the views of others and I am capable of seeing their point and you refuse to do so.

When I was working full time the degrees of my adversaries meant zilch to me and, if you answer Archer and list your Phd?s it will not matter a bit to this discussion with me. A good hard working lawyer can spend a weekend focused on the surgery a neurosurgeon performed and study the issue completely so as to competently cross examine that surgeon on each aspect of what was intended, what was done and why the result, or the written opinion, was to be questioned. Science condensed into 48 hours.

I have been going along with your dogma mistakenly thinking that you would respond logically when someone provided answers to your self esteemed maneuverings. I enjoy your consistency but not your failure to ever confront a logical discussion that fails to conform to your religion.

You may not think so but you are the most ?religious? person here. AMEN!
jjw

jjw004 wrote:
"It is your constant bombardment of other people?s views that gets me involved with your postings."

It is not their views. It is their hypocrisy. I keep saying that but you don't like the message.

I too tolerate the views of others. I have risked my life to defend the freedom of others to do things I personally find offensive: Which I might add includes you. This isn't about toleration. It is about hypocrisy.

Simply put. If you believe in your God then act like it. And that doesn't mean prosletyzing. It doesn't mean that with every advance of science you trot out your religious belief and claim evolution never happened. It doesn't mean defending the indefensible such as the Inquisition and the repetition of wars fought between different denominations of your religion.

If someone truly believes in the god of the Old and/or New Testament I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with them brainwashing innocent children. I do have a problem with them hypocritically refusing to acknowledge the creation of smallpox. I do have a problem with hypocrisy.

jjw004 wrote:
"You may not think so but you are the most ?religious? person here. AMEN!"

Perhaps. But not the most hypocritical. And that is what matters.

Just once I'd like to see a "true believer" acknowledge that the God he believes in has done evil things: Just once!

Hey DA,

Hecate and the Greek/Roman pantheon did lots of evil things and as Hecate is one of my favorite deities I hope this makes you feel a little better. :p

I don't even worship the ground I stand on. But Machiavelli's Prince had one thing going for him: Integrity. He made no claim of benevolence.

Good Morning DA.

It is a beautifull day here in Palm Desert, California. I decided to ignore your posts on the Origins Board. They do not concern any of my personal beliefs.
JJW

Hey,

I grew up in 1000 Palms, small cyberworld isn't it!!!

jjw004 ... perhaps you should get in out of the sun.

You just wrote:
"I decided to ignore your posts on the Origins Board. They do not concern any of my personal beliefs."

Glad to hear it. If this keeps up we might just be able to get back to a single science board in which science is discussed. Though I'll not be holding my breath.

DA:

One exception. I repeat;
I decided to ignore your posts on the Origins Board. They do not concern any of my personal beliefs."
jjw

Try harder and no doubt you can break yourself of the unclean habit of reading and responding to my posts.

Others have. You can too.

DA:

You do not give your self credit. You are the main stream of the Origins Board yet you wish to refer to it with distain.

Of 35 topics listed DA made 9 original posts.
Of the 35 topics DA currently, today, has made 20 replies. I made one post and one current reply. It looks to me that DA dominates this unworthy board.
jjw

It was too good to be true. Here you are reading my posts and responding again. Have you considered a 12 step program?

I have nothing but disdain for this and would shed no tears if Kate would take science seriously and get rid of this and other similar rubbish.

But until she does I will engage with every hypocritical parrot that perches here and tries to brain wash people with their personal theology by pointing out its inconsistencies, its lies, and if appropriate, its history of hypcrisy.

Now you made a promise and you broke it. You said: "I decided to ignore your posts on the Origins Board" and you didn't. Please try harder. Lying is, after all, a sin.

can't stop clicking ......must tear eyes away from board...auuuggggghhh!!!

(ahh the addiction of forums)

I have a nice 18 year old scotch, some ice cubes, and two glasses. Care to join me?

Never ... ever ... take life too seriously. ;-)