Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 35 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 34 35
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Blacknad the fact that you can point to a handful of problems with humans behaving as humans is laughable from the standpoint of what you are trying to put forward as a postulate.

Now if one looks at politicians ... you might find the polar opposite ... a handful that are not deceitful.

I find it disingenuous for you to make the claim you did while using electricity, using the internet, taking antibiotics, drinking safe water, taking the train, and otherwise fully embracing the benefits that science brings.

The day you can show me an example of a religious organization curing a disease with prayer lets start with malaria or polio or AIDS please let me know.

Or the day you can discern whether lifeforms exist on Europa by reading scripture let me know that too.

Perhaps you would like a different scientific discipline. Can you use some methodology other than science to predict earthquakes? Monitor volcanoes? Predict hurricanes? Keep bacteria out of our food supply? Deliver babies with near 100% success? Keep the lights turned on? Build a bridge? Fly to Paris? The list is endless.

For you to write as you did "I used to think that scientists were impartial" strikes me as being intellectually dishonest as I know you are far too intelligent a person not to be able to distinguish a bad apple from the tree from which it fell.


DA Morgan
.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Relgking wrote:
"By the way, I happen to believe and am hopeful that moral, ethical, and loving scientists, in cooperation with rational and scientific philosophers and theologians, are capable of creating the kind of world we all need. I also have some suggestions."

Well if you can find a rational theologian it might be possible. So far the history of theology demonstrates this creature to be extinct.

It is more likely that a polar bear, under an appropriate coordinate transformation, would become a rectangular bear than that you can demonstrate theology to be anything other than irrational.


DA Morgan
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
DAM, Albert Schweitzer is dead, but I think there are many young doctors who still follow his model
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Schweitzer
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1952/schweitzer-bio.html

NORMAN COUSINS, who did a book on Schweitzer has also left us a wonderful legacy which he writes about in his book: HEAD FIRST--THE BIOLOGY OF HOPE (1989). The book is really about SPIRIT FIRST--the biology of faith hope and love.

ANATOMY ON AN ILLNESS--the book
Because of his own recovery--using the power of his mind--laughter and nutrients, not drugs--and spirit--though he was not an MD he was recruited by UCLA's great medical school as an adjunct professor. There he spent ten years teaching young doctors how to heal the whole person, not just be body mechanics. His book tells the story of those ten years.

http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unitarians/cousins.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Cousins
http://www.npi.ucla.edu/center/cousins/index.html

BTW, DAM, where did you learn how to write in such an interesting and provocative style? Tell me, maybe I could go there and take a course. smile Did Dale Carnegie and Norman Vincent Peale go to that school too? Or did it come in your genes? laugh laugh
Seriously, gadflies do serve a purpose, I think!!! But it would be helpful if your criticisms were balanced, once in a while.

Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 12:45 AM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Originally Posted By: DA Morgan
...strikes me as being intellectually dishonest...


Dan,

I apologise for having doubts, but heck, you are the one that introduced me to doubt in the first place.

Reading my post again - it doesn't represent my thinking accurately. I know where we would be without science, and it ain't a pretty place.

But I have still been somewhat surprised to see how many times people find it hard to speak against the consensus and current paradigm (which may well be subject to change anyway).

Black -eyed- nad. (Go a bit easier on me)

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Blacknad wrote:
"But it would be helpful if your criticisms were balanced, once in a while."

I thought I did a remarkably good job when I stated what I believe to be the truth: "I know you are far too intelligent a person ...."

Now where did I learn to write this way? Next time I'm in B'ham I'll tell you. That is not a subject to the web.

But please do not blame scientists for being human. We are. We make the same mistakes. The same errors in judgement. And have the exact same weaknesses as do mortals.

What distinguishes us, I believe, is what distinguished the Founding Father's of America from those that came before. We believe in a system of checks-and-balances. We readily acknowledge the errors of Einstein, Bohr, Darwin, and others that some would like to put up in a Pantheon. We demand that authors subject themselves to peer review. Not even a Hawking or a Gell Mann or a Feynman can publish without being put into the cross-hairs. In short ... we do our best to be intellectually honest. And when we find someone like that biologist in Korea who faked his results ... we rather quickly catapult them into the moat. We're not perfect but we're not barristers or politicians or used car salesmen either.

Blacknad wrote:
"I apologise for having doubts, but heck, you are the one that introduced me to doubt in the first place."

No apology required. I'd rather have you doubt and question than accept at face value.

Blacknad wrote:
"Reading my post again - it doesn't represent my thinking accurately."

I had a pretty strong indication of that or I'd have never used the word "disingenuous." That is a word I don't use without carefully consideration. Oh heck then I just throw in a litre of petrol to make sure.

I wish you'd been at the AAS meeting here in Seattle. The number of times undergrads challenged the accepted norm was refreshing. Sure they will have their feet put to the fire and be expected to provide further proof. But when they do ... they will be honored ... not scorned.


DA Morgan
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
DAM, no real harm done; but when you said
Quote:
Blacknad wrote:
"But it would be helpful if your criticisms were balanced, once in a while."
you were quoting me, LGK, not Blacknad. It is kinda nice to know that we can all be fallible, at times, eh?

You go on commenting and adding to your list of misplaced quotes
Quote:
I thought I did a remarkably good job when I stated what I believe to be the truth: "I know you are far too intelligent a person ...."

Now where did I learn to write this way? Next time I'm in B'ham I'll tell you. That is not a subject to the web.

But please do not blame scientists for being human. We are. We make the same mistakes. The same errors in judgement.
Now this is I will make a clear note of and file away for future use.
Quote:
And have the exact same weaknesses as do mortals.
You sound like an agnostic theologian. smile

And you go on, and on
Quote:
What distinguishes us, I believe, is what distinguished the Founding Father's of America from those that came before.

We believe in a system of checks-and-balances. We readily acknowledge the errors of Einstein, Bohr, Darwin, and others that some would like to put up in a Pantheon. We demand that authors subject themselves to peer review.
And are you implying that all philosophers and theologians do not? Oh, Come now!!! With two postgraduates degrees in theology, I demand a little more respect, here!! laugh laugh And please, leave the BSing to me. laugh



Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 01:27 AM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
I think I know why the cynics and the nihilists love to dismiss and kill new ideas and new ways of doing things for the greater good of all of us. It is oh so easy!

It is takes energy, real effort, curiosity, intellgence, imagination and loving concern for anyone to take the time to grasp, really critique, to explore the new, and then take action.

Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 01:52 AM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
BTW, I noticed that the work of the great work of the doctor, theologian and musician, Albert Schweitzer at al was totally ignored.

Schweitzer once said"It is supposed to be a professional secret, but I will tell you anyway. We doctors do little. We only help and encourage the doctor within."

http://www.allspiritual.com/MultiFaith.php3
http://www.slbmi.com/psychology_religion/psychology_religion_team.htm
http://www.healingmusic.org/Library/Articles/MusicAndSoundInHealingFromCancer.asp
http://www.aasianst.org/absts/1995abst/inter/inter54.htm

Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 02:45 AM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Originally Posted By: DA Morgan
Blacknad wrote:
"But it would be helpful if your criticisms were balanced, once in a while."


Dan,

Just as Revlgking said - it wasn't me that said this. I know your criticisms are balanced more than 'once in a while'.

Thanks for your response though.

I have seen you do this before on a few occasions, (attribute a quote to the wrong person). Is it a peculiar form of dyslexia you have - weblexia? Or are you always in a hurry?

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Post deleted by Amaranth Rose II

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
DIALOGUING TO COMMUNICATE
Correction: I should have written: I think I know why the cynics and the nihilists love to dismiss and kill most new ideas, and even new ways of doing things, which could be of value and for the greater good of all of us. It is oh so easy to knock!

It takes energy, real effort, curiosity, intelligence, imagination, faith, hope and loving concern for anyone to take the time to grasp, to really critique, to explore the new, and then take creative action--beginning with taking the time to understand another.

COMMUNICATING
For example, some atheists confuse PANTHEISM and PanENtheism. I asked one atheisT about PanENtheism and he answered:"There are different kinds of atheists and different approaches they take. My view is that I don't see the value of a pantheistic approach to god."

To clarify the important difference let me put the question this way to atheists: Are you aware of the work of the mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead? If so, are you aware of the difference between PANTHEISM AND panENtheism? Are you willing to find out?

Though I am easy, as you know, I like using the symbol G?D, rather than god, or God.

Why?

Because it helps me to think of the 'ground of all being'--a term for 'God' used by the great theologian, Paul Tillich--as more than a personal and Superbeing. How many have ever you heard of Paul Tillich?

If we are truly serious about the art of communication we MUST dialogue until we really understand what the other person is really saying--even if we end up disagreeing all the more.

THE CONVERSION OF A REAL ATHEIST
By the way, I once baptised a former atheist. He was my age--we were both in our twenties, at the time. Later, he actually became a successful minister.

In preparation for his baptism I asked him: What changed your mind?

But first, let me tell you how we met:

Interestingly HM's first greeting to me was: "Good to meet you, Rev. I am a devout agnostic, if not an atheist. Since you are running the only show in towm, and there is nothing else to do on Sunday, anyway, I will come and hear you...if you promise to keep me awake...." [Folowed by a loud laugh.] The rest is history.

His answer to my question, above, went something like this:

"As you know I have been coming to church for nearly six months. Needless to say, your sermons have kept me awake. Not only that, they have made me think.

And your wife's home-made bread is delicious. I should add: Your cutting my hair now and then is appreciated too. [BIG laugh!!! Before I started to cut HM's hair he had to travel to the Goosebay Air Base, seven miles up the road. He mentioned the home-made bread because we often had food and fellowship together, after church] Then he went on:

Because you gave me a definition of God which does not insult my intelligence and my imagination. I discovered that the male-like God I was raised and expected to believe in was too small.

What I was raised to believe in bordered on--more than that, it was, a mental form of idolatry. I was expected to create God in the image of my father.

Your definition of God as that which is in and through the Cosmos; as all that encompasses and inter-penetrates it, physically, mentally and spiritually...how can I deny that, and go on thinking that life has any kind of meaning?

I began to see materialism and its atheist atheology for what it is. The problem with atheism is that it is a faith in things as they appear to be. Therefore, it is without any kind of hopeful or eternal meaning. The best atheism has to offer is a good life for the fortunate few in the material now until death do us part. At the end of all our striving there is nothing but the hope of a quick and painless death when our soul-less bodies--together with all our works of engineering and art, mixed with detritus and other kinds glacial debris--will be dumped into the abyss of unconscious nothingness, there to remain, forever.

Your definition gave me the freedom to think bold new thoughts. I now see the earth, the planets, the galaxies--whatever is out there and in here (he pointed to his and brain and heart)--as truly AWE-full. [He was an avid reader of astronomy, and other things, I found out.]

I liked your sermon on what Paul wrote in Romans 8:28.
In God, all things can--I'll change that to WILL--work together for good...as we put into positive action our faith, our hope and our love".


Needless to say, the Rev. H.M. went on to become a colourful and dynamic minister. He served out his whole ministry way up in the sub-arctic north, which he loved.

When I met HM, he was a young manager with the Hudson Bay Company, the only store in Happy Valley-Goosebay, Labrador, at the time. IN 1953, there were 115 families, all squatters--living on Department of National Defense land.

As the leader of the only church in the shack town, with the help of the Church Council, I started the move to make the community into a regular municipality. This gave the people the right to own the land they lived on. They had already been up-rooted from their original shacks, which were too near the landing field. I was there when the Americans first became involved in the Viet Nam War. What a massive force of planes took of and flew over the arctic to Nam. It was a very historic moment. I had no idea, at time, of what a moment it was.

Today, there are about 9,000 people in the area. Things have changed. They even have their own radio station. Yes, the story of Happy Valley, yet to be fully documented show the role churches play in the development of communities. It also show that church people are interested is the social well-being of communities.

I do not wish to be snarky but may I ask: I wonder where the athiests were? Maybe some were among the silent adherents of my church, and were just afraid to speak up. If so, they had no need to fear; they were more than welcome.

Or were they coming to get caught up on their sleep? smile laugh





Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 07:58 PM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Revlgking wrote:
" And are you implying that all philosophers and theologians do not?"

Implying nothing. I am insisting, stating as fact, and putting it forward as a statement cast in osmiridium.

And if you think otherwise tell me the last time in which the leader of any Christian church submitted his theological doctrine to peer review. I want the name of the Imam and the Rabbi that conducted that review. Please don't descend into the depths of hypocrisy by claiming that the Pope submitting a statement to his Cardinals and Bishops is peer review.

Revlgking wrote:
"I think I know why the cynics and the nihilists love to dismiss and kill new ideas and new ways of doing things for the greater good of all of us. It is oh so easy!"

Actually you are clueless. We don't dismiss and kill new ideas. We thrive on new ideas. We embrace dark energy and axions and methane on Titan. There is difference between a "new idea" and repackaging fluff and using it to brainwash children.

Here's a quote that I think pretty much sums up my attitude toward the clergy:
"Ministers say that they teach charity.
That is natural.
They live on hand-outs.
All beggars teach that others should give."
~ Robert Ingersoll

So far you have yet to engage in a single sentence of science. What you have done is create a new meaningless spelling of the word god (G?D) as though the deity that created the entire universe would be impressed. You have linked to purely religious websites indicating an inability to converse at a science site in the language of science. You have referenced Albert Schweitzer as though using his name had some relevance to anything.: It does not.

As one of the founders of The Family Life Foundation dedicated to promoting goodness why don't you try promoting goodness here by not being an intellectually dishonest troll?

If poverty is the face of ignorance then, sir, I will send you a penny for more surely do you need one than almost anyone else on the planet.


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Relgking wrote:
"DIALOGUING TO COMMUNICATE"

Dialoguing is not a word. Are you capable of communicating in English or must everything be new-age spin-doctored woo-woo off-topic trolling?

Relgking asks:
"I wonder where the athiests were"

Discovering antibiotics, learning to harness electricity, building the internet, exploring the universe, and paying the taxes to support tax-exempt self-righteous parasites.

How many dollars did you contribute to the fight against AIDS today?


DA Morgan
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Originally Posted By: DA Morgan
Relgking,
...Dialoguing is not a word.


It isn't? Tell that to http://www.reference.com/search?db=web&q=dialoguing
and to the publishers of the World Book Two-Volume Dictionary.

It seems that my American counsins--and I have many--sometimes spell English in their own way. Do me a F A V O U R and the HONOUR of making a note of this, please.

BTW, this is the second time you pointed out my "mistake". I am getting concerned. And how about those misquotes?

How many dollars did I contribute to the fight against AIDS, etc?

The King family supports 20 charities. Thanks for the opportunity to boast. smile

ABOUT THE FAMILY LIFE FOUNDATION--http://www,flfcanada,com I head up this charity I helped found in 1974, run entirely by volunteers, of which I am the chair. One group that I attend meets weekly with several seniors we help.
ANYONE WANT TO HELP? WE ARE EASY TO FIND. BTW, I have even counseled with people using my PC.

Not too long ago, we in the FLF rescued a senior--a well-educated engineer, by the way, and totally non-addicted. He had been ripped off by non-caring family. He was living out of his car. Certain business leaders plotted and had him evicted and tried to sell his home from out under him.

Said they had a power-of-sale court order. They were lying, we found. He has been back in his home for over three years, now. His pension, which we helped him get, covers his costs.

BTW, DAM, I don't derive much pleasure d i a l o g u i n g with people who ... Well, I will leave it to you to fill in the blanks.

Last edited by Revlgking; 01/24/07 08:44 PM.

G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
Neither pantheism nor panentheism is susceptible to scientific understanding. That Whitehead was a panENtheist is no recommendation for it.

Not every thought that every scientist or mathematician had was scientific or mathematical.

I'm glad that you have devoted so much effort to making the world a better place. Thank you. I mean that sincerely.

None of it has one iota to do with science, but I'm happy to know of it nonetheless.


Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Revlgking ... you aren't dialoguing or discussing or communicating anything other than your total contempt for science and the scientific method. Not once have you, since arriving uninvited upon our doorstep, even attempted to discuss science or shown any interest in the topic.

I do not share IFF's joy in your presence. You are incapable of engaging in a discussion of science and you are seemingly ignorant of the facts with respect to the religion to which you claim adherence. The only thing you have accomplished here is to demonstrate that even a person with a Doctor of Divinity (if you even have one because there is no evidence of it on your website) is capable of ignoring the tenants of his religion.

What would it take to get you to stop being a troll and engage in a discussion of science? Money? How much?


DA Morgan
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
I tried to put this little thought on the site a few days ago but everything went spastic and I couldn't even log out. Here goes another attempt.

No one here has yet even come up with a definition of "God" let alone offered any proof for the existence of such an entity. But I read a description of "religion" that said it is the personal beliefs we hold but cannot prove that we each use to give meaning to our lives. We all have them, even atheists.

I've mentioned on this thread that it is sort of impossible to actually prove anything. Did Newton really prove that every action always has an equal and opposite reaction? Many cultures were using the basic idea before his time: What is hateful to you do not do to others, karma, utu, consciousness and energy creates reality, yin and yang, as you sow so shall you reap, hubris, what goes round comes round, etc. There may be some point along this continuum beyond which we can have no proof. The belief then becomes religion.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
I think there is a universally accepted definition of the word 'god' in monotheistic societies as they all are off-shoots of a single source of inspiration.

Whether you are talking about Judiasm, Islam, or Christianity you are talking about religions that claim to be the true authority on the religion founded by Abraham/Ibrahim.

There may be some dispute if one is trying to incorporate polytheistic beliefs but so far no one here has proselytized for any religion other than Christianity. Apparently Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, animists, etc. being more polite.


DA Morgan
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
Hang on DA. I thought there was debate in the USA at the time of 9/11 as to whether the God of Islam was the same as the Christian one. Seems the citizens of USA can agree the Jewish one is the same. But I have certainly never seen any definition by any religion of what God actually is. Perhaps someone who believes he, she or it exists may be prepared to enlighten me? We would then have a sounder basis for looking for evidence for such an entity's existence.

Another point. When did Abraham live if, in fact, he lived at all?

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Not wanting to contaminate Kate's site with this let me direct you to: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2005/06/in-defense-of-hatred.html and suggest you read the FireSign Theatre lyric posted under "What makes America great?"

Most Americans have forgotten who they were in the '60s. And now the planet suffers our hypocrisy and and conveniently short memory.

I've no doubt Abraham actually existed as the story has a ring of truth to it. If you don't want to kill your kid what better solution than to come back down off the mountain and claim god told you not to do it? And based on the following link it seems no one would dare to.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/gw_rellis10.htm

You might also want to read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religion


DA Morgan
Page 8 of 35 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 34 35

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5