The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy Theories Conspiracy Theory Forum - Discuss conspiracies and underground dealings


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 25th, 2012, 01:14 PM   #21
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
No competent scientist uses the word "theory" as a synonyme for "fact". And, neither did Darwin.

Are you actually so confused that this in some way makes sense?

No one (particularly myp) confuses theory with fact in the way you see opinion as reality.
tecoyah is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 02:48 PM   #22
Analyst
 
Bill's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Novi, Michigan
Posts: 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
No competent scientist uses the word "theory" as a synonyme for "fact". And, neither did Darwin.
Could you please explain this statement in more depth? I don't want to make assumptions about what you mean here.
Bill is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 04:39 PM   #23
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
No competent scientist uses the word "theory" as a synonyme for "fact". And, neither did Darwin.
Did I say that? Do yourself a favor and look up what theory means scientifically. A theory is not synonymous with unsupported opinion or belief in science.
myp is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 05:51 PM   #24
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
There is an argument that it has caused harm by hurting scientific progress. Sometimes to the magnitude of halting an entire culture and millions of people. Check out this if you haven't yet, it is exactly the topic Tyson talks about: http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3384
stories don't halt science, people do. It takes a level of maturity to approch science from an objective level that certain cultures just didn't have. To expect a group of people to evolve in an instant is not logical.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
They do not all say the same thing. If you look at Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, maybe, but they are far from the only religions. Throw in Hinduism and Buddhism and the similarities start to quickly erode. Put in other, older religions (or newer- Scientology), and even more so.
I never said they are exactly the same but they all have a similar component, that being that once there was nothing and then there was something, that's quite an advanced concept. For the peoples that created these stories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post

And when the Bible claims that the Earth was made in seven days or when the church claimed the Earth was the center of the universe, how did that not conflict with science?
The belief of a geocentric universe was a first level question about understanding the universe. The reason why people just didn't accept it is because we as creatures have to learn. The concepts that a planet revolves around a star needed education to understand, one visionary decided to observe objects in the sky, his observation didn't sync with popular opinion, popular opinion is the Tyrrell.

Genisis is just a story, I am not a fundamentalist, you know this, why do you insist that I am, I will not participate in this discussion with you unless you can understand there is a difference between somebody that insists that Genesis is historical fact, and someone who accepts that it isn't the actual account of the birth of earth. I have had enough of telling you I am not a fundamentalist and you insisting I am.


.

Last edited by clax; November 25th, 2012 at 06:02 PM.
clax is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 06:00 PM   #25
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
No competent scientist uses the word "theory" as a synonyme for "fact". And, neither did Darwin.
Theories are supported by conclusive evidence, not spiritual support. Out is a fact that evolution occurs, it is a theory that it has developed from permortial ooze to the mdern man. Observed adaptations have proven evolution occures, it is a theory that in the millions of years or planet has sustained life that a single cell could evolve into a person. it absolutely doesn't debunk creation, it just states that the purpose of Genesis was not to establish fact.
clax is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 06:09 PM   #26
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
stories don't halt science, people do. It takes a level of maturity to approch science from an objective level that certain cultures just didn't have. To expect a group of people to evolve in an instant is not logical.
Did you watch the video? It was the other way around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
I never said they are exactly the same but they all have a similar component, that being that once there was nothing and then there was something, that's quite an advanced concept. For the peoples that created these stories.
I am not sure that is even universal to all religions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Genisis is just a story, I am not a fundamentalist, you know this, why do you insist that I am, I will not participate in this discussion with you unless you can understand there is a difference between somebody that insists that Genesis is historical fact, and someone who accepts that it isn't the actual account of the birth of earth. I have had enough of telling you I am not a fundamentalist and you insisting I am.
I never said you believed it, but that is what it says/said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Spiritual text never claims to be a logical alternative to science, others may insist that it is, but they are wrong.
So the whole church was wrong in its interpretation when they had an issue with Copernicus' and Galileo's work? What makes you think your interpretation is more "correct" to what it is supposed to "mean"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Again you can't prove that there is no God so to say something you don't like us dead wrong is audacity and arrogance that has blinded you to anything but the ideas you support.
Not once did I say or suggest God is definitely made up, so I don't really have a response to this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
I agree creation isn't what should be tought in schools eviolution has nothing to do with any creation story, stories are not science they are stories why do you insist on cramming a square peg into a round hole.
Maybe you feel that way, but a lot of the public doesn't. Have you seen polls on how many people believe in creationism and reject evolution? Or the pressure to teach creationism next to evolution? It is scary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
If you can't tolerate others beliefs perhaps this nation isn't the right place for you, if a majority wants Christian based laws then there will be Christian based laws, we the people decide how we are governed, and the minority either accepts it or persuades the majority to vote against their beliefs. It seems you dislike democracy when people disagree with you. There are private schools, there is home school, if you don't like the polices, get up and change them, don't sit around and cry about it.
I never showed intolerance, so again, I will not respond to this. And no if a majority want Christian based laws we should not have Christian based laws- have you ever heard of the first amendment or separation of church and state?

Also, the minority was never meant to "accept" it. We aren't a democracy. We are a republic. And for a reason.

And no one is crying- we are having a discussion. You don't like that the dictionary isn't the end-all of definitions, yet you have discussed that here too- nothing wrong with that, you can't always be changing the world. As for suggesting that I don't belong in this country, etc. etc. - using that sort of logic, I could say you don't belong in this century
myp is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 07:06 PM   #27
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I am not sure that is even universal to all religions.
Never mentioned religion, just stories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I never said you believed it, but that is what it says/said.
That is what you have inturpreted it to say.

[QUOTE=myp;33598]
So the whole church was wrong in its interpretation when they had an issue with Copernicus' and Galileo's work? What makes you think your interpretation is more "correct" to what it is supposed to "mean"?[/QOUTE] Obviously the church was wrong, just look at the evidence, it is fallible, it is a creation of man after all.


]
My interpretation isn't correct, there is no such thing as a correct interpretation of spiritual text, my interpretation is my own, it only maters to me, I don't need council of others, it is between my lord and I, nobody else is involved, no church, pastor, or religion. I don't know where you come up with this notion that every body has to agree with my beliefs to affirm them, I don't suffer from that level of existential angst

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Not once did I say or suggest God is definitely made up, so I don't really have a response to this.
you carried on about fairy tails, so yes you did, my response was rather nasty and I apologize for that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Maybe you feel that way, but a lot of the public doesn't. Have you seen polls on how many people believe in creationism and reject evolution? Or the pressure to teach creationism next to evolution? It is scary.
It is a public school, the public gets to decide the curriculum, it is how the system works. Take responsibility for your own kids, tell them that evolution is the scientifically formulated theory of the origin of the species,. Most of what kids learn is from their parents. In my public school they thought evolution. My folks thought me Abbott the things the school had wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I never showed intolerance, so again, I will not respond to this. And no if a majority want Christian based laws we should not have Christian based laws- have you ever heard of the first amendment or separation of church and state?
The first amendment isn't about deputation of church and state, it is the state not respecting a particular religion. If the people in a democracy agree that murder or drug use is wrong it is the duty of the public servants to serve the public, it isn't anybody's right to say that someone can't have that opinion because it is based in Christian beliefs. It works the other way to in some states prostitution is legal, gay marriage is legal, recreational drug use is legal. If you don't like the government where you live, change it or move, its simple,


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Also, the minority was never meant to "accept" it. We aren't a democracy. We are a republic. And for a reason.
You are correct we are a republic, but the way or laws are written is based on what the people want other wise its a tyranny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
And no one is crying- we are having a discussion. You don't like that the dictionary isn't the end-all of definitions, yet you have discussed that here too- nothing wrong with that, you can't always be changing the world. As for suggesting that I don't belong in this country, etc. etc. - using that sort of logic, I could say you don't belong in this century
I absolutly belong in this century, you stated that polls support creationism over non creation so it looks like I do belong very comparably.

If your definition of a word is opposite of what the dictionary says, you are no authority on meanings of words, it is your interpretation of a word that I disagree with, but as we learned about interpretation it isn't correct, you are entitled to fabricate meanings that only have value to you, but like me you must remember that it isn't your place to force your beliefs down every one eels's thought.

Try this approch to life it really makes life much more pleasant, live and let live.
clax is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 07:23 PM   #28
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Never mentioned religion, just stories.
You said "they" all say the same thing. What is the "they" you were referring to then? All the stories? Which stories? If you meant religious stories, then no, I don't think that is true. But this is unimportant semantics I think, so we can drop it if you want to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
My interpretation isn't correct, there is no such thing as a correct interpretation of spiritual text, my interpretation is my own, it only maters to me, I don't need council of others, it is between my lord and I, nobody else is involved, no church, pastor, or religion. I don't know where you come up with this notion that every body has to agree with my beliefs to affirm them, I don't suffer from that level of existential angst
So your interpretation is just your own yet you say the church was wrong about its interpretation? How does that make sense? Do you see my point now? The interpretations matter. And there have been widely held interpretations that have made religion and science clash to the point where religion has denied science in the past. And we still see it today in some areas like with creationism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
you carried on about fairy tails, so yes you did, my response was rather nasty and I apologize for that.
I never said God didn't exist in any of our discussions. What I have said is believing in God is not a scientific conclusion. What I have also said is that people are free to believe in fairy tales, but I never said believing in God means you believe in a fairy tale.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
It is a public school, the public gets to decide the curriculum, it is how the system works. Take responsibility for your own kids, tell them that evolution is the scientifically formulated theory of the origin of the species,. Most of what kids learn is from their parents. In my public school they thought evolution. My folks thought me Abbott the things the school had wrong.
The public gets to decide- I am a part of that public. Sorry, but if the public thinks the school should teach kids about why becoming a criminal is good, I will fight that too. Wouldn't you? Schools can't teach ANYTHING. That doesn't make sense and it doesn't matter what kind of majority you might have.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
The first amendment isn't about deputation of church and state, it is the state not respecting a particular religion. If the people in a democracy agree that murder or drug use is wrong it is the duty of the public servants to serve the public, it isn't anybody's right to say that someone can't have that opinion because it is based in Christian beliefs. It works the other way to in some states prostitution is legal, gay marriage is legal, recreational drug use is legal. If you don't like the government where you live, change it or move, its simple,
I suggest you look further at what the first amendment entails and the landmark cases around that that the SCOTUS has ruled on in the past. Public schools are public- they are government owned.

Very few if anyone is 100% happy with every law on the books, so no, it is not "simple" to just get up and move. Especially for the anarchist's challenge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
You are correct we are a republic, but the way or laws are written is based on what the people want other wise its a tyranny.
You are jumping from one extreme to the other here. There is a large middle ground. The point of a Republic is to avoid the tyranny of the majority.


Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
I absolutly belong in this century, you stated that polls support creationism over non creation so it looks like I do belong very comparably.
Actually, it's more around 50-50 last I checked. But that's besides the point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
If your definition of a word is opposite of what the dictionary says, you are no authority on meanings of words, it is your interpretation of a word that I disagree with, but as we learned about interpretation it isn't correct, you are entitled to fabricate meanings that only have value to you, but like me you must remember that it isn't your place to force your beliefs down every one eels's thought.
No one is fabricating anything. You just don't understand the meanings of some words. And I am not the only one that has said it- David has said it and tecoyah has suggested it. Do you think we are all conspiring against you? Of course not. Ever think that you might have it wrong? Go ask an English professor if you need an expert's opinion or look online.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Try this approch to life it really makes life much more pleasant, live and let live.
I think my life is quite pleasant as is, so I don't really need to change my approach (also you clearly know very little about my personal philosophy- if I was such a tyrant against opposing views as you make me out to be, why would I try my best to let people share their opinions on this site even when it sometimes gets borderline crazy instead of just banning them?)
myp is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 08:18 PM   #29
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
You said "they" all say the same thing. What is the "they" you were referring to then? All the stories? Which stories? If you meant religious stories, then no, I don't think that is true. But this is unimportant semantics I think, so we can drop it if you want to.
they, meant the subject of the post being stories, for English to flow you don't have to keep repeating the subject of the sentences, to stop somebody from adding meaning to a word that was never implied.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
So your interpretation is just your own yet you say the church was wrong about its interpretation? How does that make sense? Do you see my point now? The interpretations matter. And there have been widely held interpretations that have made religion and science clash to the point where religion has denied science in the past. And we still see it today in some areas like with creationism.
First, creationism isn't science, so that clash is fabricated by people who need others to support their beliefs, which yours into my best point, my beliefs are not sponsered by a group of anybody, they are capable to stand on their own. You will never understand this until you realize you don't need others to affirm you. I don't rely on religious corrupt entities with sinister motives to affirm my belief, I don't need it. I don't belong to a church, I was once catholic, but am no longer. Why do I need to affirm something deeply personal and completely esoteric with others? My seems of self isn't that fragile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I never said God didn't exist in any of our discussions. What I have said is believing in God is not a scientific conclusion. What I have also said is that people are free to believe in fairy tales, but I never said believing in God means you believe in a fairy tale.
Why use those words? You certainly implied.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
The public gets to decide- I am a part of that public. Sorry, but if the public thinks the school should teach kids about why becoming a criminal is good, I will fight that too. Wouldn't you? Schools can't teach ANYTHING. That doesn't make sense and it doesn't matter what kind of majority you might have.
Yes you are a part of the public, you have the right to make your case, I understand why you never succede in persuation, you have a tendency to condecend to people who don't agree with you, a very common trait of people who share your opinions, using psychological princaples I come to the conclusion that you hate religion based on your polorizing langueage. You may have two doctorates but your persuasive skills are terrible.

you are right, schools can't teach anything they want, they have to adhear to what their administration perscribes, if the tax payers choose a candidate that is more pro creation thsn that is what is valuble to that community to learn. Insted of insisting religious people are backward and belong to past centuries, make the case that there is no systement that religion is wrong, som basic persuasion skills, really. Its like you want all religion wiped away. Make your position known, insted of insiting everybody agree with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I suggest you look further at what the first amendment entails and the landmark cases around that that the SCOTUS has ruled on in the past. Public schools are public- they are government owned.
Court cases are not amendments, they simply set presadent. Church and state are seperate, complete seperation would be nullifying the peoples votes, being that most are Christian. What right do you have to tell people they can't vote to their beliefs you seem to want it both ways.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Very few if anyone is 100% happy with every law on the books, so no, it is not "simple" to just get up and move. Especially for the anarchist's challenge.
If the anarchist shouldn't get to dictate rules why do you wish to? Why should the law make you totally happy, you have to compromise with the people around you, you seem to want every thing. Something about that is people who will settle for nothing less then everything always end up with nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
You are jumping from one extreme to the other here. There is a large middle ground. The point of a Republic is to avoid the tyranny of the majority.
I agree, the majority has not been tyrannical over the minority, public schools don't force children to worship any God, there is no forced religious ritual, there is no prayer in school, the school belongs completely to the secular realm except for one small Tony bit of meaningless theory, that is intolerance if I ever saw it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
No one is fabricating anything. You just don't understand the meanings of some words. And I am not the only one that has said it- David has said it and tecoyah has suggested it. Do you think we are all conspiring against you? Of course not. Ever think that you might have it wrong? Go ask an English professor if you need an expert's opinion or look online.
You fabricated a meaning that was in complete opposition to the dictionary, if I wad to point at the ground and say that is up, there is no linguistic gymnastics that could make me right. That aside this is a stupid argument fine you are right I don't care. What ever you get people to agree with you on is so, if you insisted that you were a three headed purple dragon from outerspace and a couple of people agreed, I guess then it must be so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
I think my life is quite pleasant as is, so I don't really need to change my approach (also you clearly know very little about my personal philosophy- if I was such a tyrant against opposing views as you make me out to be, why would I try my best to let people share their opinions on this site even when it sometimes gets borderline crazy instead of just banning them?)
You are, you insist that you must be right, and claim your opinion to be fact, it really is about me, you just have an issue with me going back to your argument about economy, your position was opinion based, and I illustrated that but just like a belligerent evangelical fundamentalist you insisted my opinion was wrong, you think opinions can be wrong, I learned in first grade that opinions were things that have no proof, I agree with you almost completely but that tiny point that I disagree is your mission to stomp out. I don't give up to your stomping and it frustrates you so deeply to the point you resort to calling my intelligence into question. There is room for every body, and everybody's beliefs, you reject that.

Last edited by clax; November 25th, 2012 at 08:54 PM.
clax is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 08:29 PM   #30
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Well, we are done here because it is clear that you think you know it all and don't want to listen to facts or other viewpoints. It is somewhat ironic that you call me condescending because at least I am open to other views if you can present them in a fact or logic based manner. You, on the other hand, seem to have everything figured out and then criticize others when you don't understand something like science, the clash of religion and science, definitions of words, etc. You cover this up by pretending everything is equally supported opinion (except for definitions from the dictionary), which just isn't true. The world isn't cut black and white with everything being equal one way or the other. It is mostly varying shades/intensities of grey.

The other issue is that you continually seem to jump to conclusions that have not been offered. For example, your response to my bit on tyranny of the majority completely misunderstood the point.

And before you say once more that the clash was imagined, tell that to Galileo who was accused of heresy and sent to indefinite imprisonment because of his advocacy of Copernican heliocentrism.
myp is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 09:45 PM   #31
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Well, we are done here because it is clear that you think you know it all and don't want to listen to facts or other viewpoints.
you are done because the above statement is total hypocrisy. I illustrated from the very beginning that I understand atheism, you try to force me into a mold. I don't accept your opinions that you pretend are facts,

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
It is somewhat ironic that you call me condescending because at least I am open to other views if you can present them in a fact or logic based manner.
Beliefs are not fact based you harbor prejudice against anybody that has any that go against yours, my evidence is the last thread you destroyed attempting to force your farcical beliefs down my thought


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
You, on the other hand, seem to have everything figured out and then criticize others when you don't understand something like science,
I criticize the fabrications you created because they are a farce. And the conflict between religion and science is perpetuated by people like you who must remove all of belief from humanity. Your delusion must be a terrible place
Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
clash of religion and science, definitions of words, etc. You cover this up by pretending everything is equally supported opinion (except for definitions from the dictionary), which just isn't true. The world isn't cut black and white with everything being equal one way or the other. It is mostly varying shades/intensities of grey.
I absolutely accept a gray area this display of frustration that is your need to affirm yourself is your biggest crux, its why you fail at every argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
The other issue is that you continually seem to jump to conclusions that have not been offered. For example, your response to my bit on tyranny of the majority completely misunderstood the point.
Your point was that your position is the only one that matters, everybody else that doesn't agree just can't understand. You want to be a tyrant, that is clear you place false rules on science.


Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
And before you say once more that the clash was imagined, tell that to Galileo who was accused of heresy and sent to indefinite imprisonment because of his advocacy of Copernican heliocentrism.
The clash isn't because of a book, or a building, it was because of a governing body known as the church in those days they ruled many nations. I never deny the things a government has done to oppress its people be it a theocratic government or otherwise.

It wasn't something that doesn't exist by your evaluation, imaginary things don't have that kind of power. it was people, who had power that saw a set of facts that could potentially undermine that power. The tyrant that was the church did need to keep people I'm the dark to maintain its strangle hold.

what anybody believes is irrelevant, what happened was a man was silenced because he knew too much. Any extra frustration you have due to your anger toward religion is your hurdle to over come. Why you see it necessary to involve yourself in my belief structure is a classic example of exterior locus of self worth. You wouldn't spend pages and hours trying to convince me of your pointless positions.

Arrogant people are often insecure.
clax is offline  
Old November 25th, 2012, 10:00 PM   #32
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Why get so frustrated myp, just agree to disagree. I have spent many posts agreeing to disagree. Why must I agree with you, what do you gain by that.

clax is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 09:22 AM   #33
Representative
 
=Zoomer='s Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 174

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax
Arrogant people are often insecure.
Non-arrogant people are often insecure as well.....for the same or different reasons. What does that have to do with anything? Are you trying to say that myp is insecure? Personally, I'm insecure because my penis isn't big enough ...

People that "believe" in science over religion do so because their sense of logic dictates that conclusion. People that "believe" in religion/stories/whatever, without empirical evidence do so because they believe there is more to "everything" than what science can affirm or refute.

The one thing I would mention (in my opinion only), I "believe" in order for either or both to be true, they must be consistent with each other. Science does NOT believe or disbelieve in religion. It has no opinion at all (other then Steven Hawking who has scientifically proven "God" doesn't exist! lol).

In the end, you can choose to believe in one or the other (or both). My personal opinion is that religious people more often lack the capacity to comprehend science (or are simply not interested in it's conclusions), and scientifically/logically oriented people comprehend only scientific/physical evidence for the existence of anything.
=Zoomer= is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 11:02 AM   #34
Representative
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: USA
Posts: 141

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Theories are supported by conclusive evidence, not spiritual support.
You wouldn't find one scientist in a hundred who would agree with that ignorant nonsense.

Quote:
Out is a fact that evolution occurs, it is a theory that it has developed from permortial ooze to the mdern man.
See my first comment in this post.

[Why doesn't his forum have a belief statement, like other religious forums?]
Hammer is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 11:58 AM   #35
Analyst
 
Bill's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2012
From: Novi, Michigan
Posts: 77

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
You wouldn't find one scientist in a hundred who would agree with that ignorant nonsense.



See my first comment in this post.

[Why doesn't his forum have a belief statement, like other religious forums?]
Are you serious?
Bill is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 01:38 PM   #36
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
Why get so frustrated myp, just agree to disagree. I have spent many posts agreeing to disagree. Why must I agree with you, what do you gain by that.

Because you can't dispute everything in the world. Some things are more proven than others. But I am not frustrated, I am not insecure (quite the opposite when it comes to this issue actually), and I am not arrogant. I don't understand why you have to repeat these opinions ad nauseum- you don't even know who I am- you don't know my name, you don't know what I do, yet you insist that I am these things. Well, whatever, I don't care you are some random person on the internet who does not understand a lot of things and I don't have the time or energy to explain them to you. That is not me being frustrated, but is me making a calculated decision to stop partaking in a discussion where the other side is a brick wall. I hope you can understand that.
myp is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 02:37 PM   #37
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
Because you can't dispute everything in the world. Some things are more proven than others. But I am not frustrated, I am not insecure (quite the opposite when it comes to this issue actually), and I am not arrogant. I don't understand why you have to repeat these opinions ad nauseum- you don't even know who I am- you don't know my name, you don't know what I do, yet you insist that I am these things. Well, whatever, I don't care you are some random person on the internet who does not understand a lot of things and I don't have the time or energy to explain them to you. That is not me being frustrated, but is me making a calculated decision to stop partaking in a discussion where the other side is a brick wall. I hope you can understand that.
This statement is extremely arrogant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
who does not understand a lot of things
You don't know me, or what I do and don't understand, you are just some random person on the internet that created a political forum to talk down to people who disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by myp View Post
but is me making a calculated decision to stop partaking in a discussion where the other side is a brick wall. I hope you can understand that.
[/QUOTE] You are the brick wall, you are the one saying that people who believe in things can not be scientists, I said people are capable of looking at things objectively no matter their belief, your statements were prejudiced.
clax is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 02:41 PM   #38
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by =Zoomer= View Post
Non-arrogant people are often insecure as well.....for the same or different reasons. What does that have to do with anything? Are you trying to say that myp is insecure? Personally, I'm insecure because my penis isn't big enough ...

People that "believe" in science over religion do so because their sense of logic dictates that conclusion. People that "believe" in religion/stories/whatever, without empirical evidence do so because they believe there is more to "everything" than what science can affirm or refute.

The one thing I would mention (in my opinion only), I "believe" in order for either or both to be true, they must be consistent with each other. Science does NOT believe or disbelieve in religion. It has no opinion at all (other then Steven Hawking who has scientifically proven "God" doesn't exist! lol).

In the end, you can choose to believe in one or the other (or both). My personal opinion is that religious people more often lack the capacity to comprehend science (or are simply not interested in it's conclusions), and scientifically/logically oriented people comprehend only scientific/physical evidence for the existence of anything.
Address this to myp he has been holding a grudge with me because I agree with you, he will back pedal and lie and say he agrees with you although he argued the same point when I made it.
clax is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 02:52 PM   #39
Banned
 
Joined: Jan 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 1,975

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
You wouldn't find one scientist in a hundred who would agree with that ignorant nonsense.
Seriously? Oh well I guess theories are just cooked up by mad men in basements and the people that see the evidence that supports the theories are just brainwashed followers.

Come on hammer that is absurd

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer View Post
See my first comment in this post.

[Why doesn't his forum have a belief statement, like other religious forums?]
Doesn't need one, you insist that theories are beliefs, perhaps people believe the theory but unlike a belief in God, there is irrefutable evidence that supports theories. God requires a leap of faith, the theory relies on evidence.

If it is just like a belief in God, where there is no proof either way, refutiate the theory, I am interested, genuinely. Keep in mind the Bible is inspirational spiritual text and has no real place in the realm of science.
clax is offline  
Old November 26th, 2012, 03:31 PM   #40
myp
Founding Father
 
myp's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2009
From: us
Posts: 5,841

Quote:
Originally Posted by clax View Post
You are the brick wall, you are the one saying that people who believe in things can not be scientists, I said people are capable of looking at things objectively no matter their belief, your statements were prejudiced.
Yea, I never said that. I can't tell if you have a comprehension issue or you actually disagree with me. And go ahead, go search through all my posts- you won't find me ever saying that a scientist can't believe some things (what I did say was that coming from a position of science you cannot believe- considerably different).

As for the arrogance bit again, if you were to argue 1+1=3 I don't really care how much you think it is opinion, the fact is 1+1=2. I know my credentials in real life and I have had the privilege of seeing science being conducted at a renowned, research university in this country. You can think it is arrogant when I say this is the way science is, but it is. You are arguing 1+1=3. If you saw someone do that, wouldn't you insist that 1+1=2 too? Or would you sit back because you think there is some validity to 1+1=3 and if you challenged it that would make you seem arrogant?

And I don't have a grudge against you...
myp is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Conspiracy Theories

Tags
conspiracy , creation , story , theory



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LEAKED: "The TRUTH Behind Big Bird: The Romney Conspiracy" (TheWashingtonFancy) joe40001 Political Humor 0 November 15th, 2012 05:09 AM
"Super Mario" takes over as Trichet's term comes to a close myp Current Events 6 November 5th, 2011 07:22 PM
Official records from international red cross prove "holocaust" was a fraud Carpediem Conspiracy Theories 7 September 28th, 2011 07:43 AM
From "cap and trade" to "pollution reduction targets" myp Current Events 12 March 9th, 2010 07:30 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.