Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

then liberals must be consistent and apply that rationale to the unproven theory of evolution...but they don't. :P 

As also are many conservatives known not to with THEIR Intelligent Design "theory".  :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Even if there is only one possible unified theory [of the universe], it is just a set of rules and equations. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe." — Stephen Hawking

 

Ask the philosophers or keep an eye for a Trump tweet

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Holy passion of friendship is so sweet and steady and loyal and enduring a nature that it will last through a whole lifetime, if not asked to lend money."--Mark Twain

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Anyone with a cellphone today is paparazzi; anyone with a Twitter account is a reporter; anyone with YouTube access is a filmmaker. When everyone is a paparazzi, reporter and filmmaker, everyone else is a public figure." –Thomas Friedman (from a column in the New York Times on June 23, 2012.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"I suppose you could say I've made a tremendous professional mess of my life, but oddly enough I can't really see it that way, and I don't live amid much regret. I just did what seemed right at the time and if it went wrong, well I assumed that life was rather like that. It really doesn't do to hope or plan for too much; something usually happens to mess it all up." ----James Mason

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"My life is in the hands of any fool who can cause me to lose my temper"

 

From a sampler my Grandmother had on her wall for years.  Regrefully, I can't recall who it's attributed to.

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened".

Dr. Seuss

 

Vince Scully, during the last game he broadcasted (just last year), said this to characterize how he felt about the imminent end to his 69-year-old career as a broadcasted. I didn't realize he was quoting anyone. I'm sure he attributed it to its proper source, I just missed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vince Scully, during the last game he broadcasted (just last year), said this to characterize how he felt about the imminent end to his 69-year-old career as a broadcasted. I didn't realize he was quoting anyone. I'm sure he attributed it to its proper source, I just missed it.

I found the quote in an old book and it was credited to Dr. Seuss. After a little research I found out that the quote is attributed to Dr. Seuss without any other information to back up the claim.

I should have double-checked first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As also are many conservatives known not to with THEIR Intelligent Design "theory".  :P

intelligent design is intuitively perceptible and is not theory.

 

evolution is like saying the materials for a 3-speed racer bike came out of the earth by themselves and fashioned themselves into the finished bike all by themselves.

 

incredible because lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentient of itself.

 

intelligent design proposes that all things perceivable were designed and then implemented into reality by an all-encompassing higher power.

 

why does science reject the existence of spirit? because spirit is not physically discernable, of course.

 

suppose an object were cloaked or hidden behind a false wall and a man or woman is told there is an object at the center of the room. he looks and sees nothing but is assured there is indeed an object within. continuing to see nothing he then asserts that what has been told to him is wrong and mistaken. no object lies within. he or she is then made aware of the false wall and the object hidden behind is revealed and the person becomes dumbfounded because he or she was so sure there was nothing in the room.

 

for most of my life modern science always kept a healthy open mind to the possible existence of the unfathomable. sadly, liberal scientists and their arrogance has now changed that. they are now sure of what can never be sure.

 

remarkable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

intelligent design is intuitively perceptible and is not theory.

 

evolution is like saying the materials for a 3-speed racer bike came out of the earth by themselves and fashioned themselves into the finished bike all by themselves.

 

incredible because lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentient of itself.

 

intelligent design proposes that all things perceivable were designed and then implemented into reality by an all-encompassing higher power.

 

 

And if you ever closely examined what the theory of evolution proposes, instead of being led by the nose by people who automatically reject anything they don't or refuse to understand.

 

As I've long been told by some religious "scholars" that the biblical "day" is of an unknown length, and that the Earth and all on it wasn't  necessarily created in the same "week" that we've  been long familiar with opens the door for creation to BE evolutionary, as a deity that deals largely with matters of infinity  might TAKE  a few million of what we call "years" to get things to where he/she likes them.

 

And BTW, I agree with your "lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentinent of itself" statement.  Insomuch as it largely defines why I have issues with any ghost stories or accounts of spectral encounters that describe those apparitions seen wearing the clothes that they were wearing when they died.  ;)

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites

intelligent design is intuitively perceptible and is not theory.

 

evolution is like saying the materials for a 3-speed racer bike came out of the earth by themselves and fashioned themselves into the finished bike all by themselves.

 

incredible because lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentient of itself.

 

intelligent design proposes that all things perceivable were designed and then implemented into reality by an all-encompassing higher power.

 

why does science reject the existence of spirit? because spirit is not physically discernable, of course.

 

suppose an object were cloaked or hidden behind a false wall and a man or woman is told there is an object at the center of the room. he looks and sees nothing but is assured there is indeed an object within. continuing to see nothing he then asserts that what has been told to him is wrong and mistaken. no object lies within. he or she is then made aware of the false wall and the object hidden behind is revealed and the person becomes dumbfounded because he or she was so sure there was nothing in the room.

 

for most of my life modern science always kept a healthy open mind to the possible existence of the unfathomable. sadly, liberal scientists and their arrogance has now changed that. they are now sure of what can never be sure.

 

remarkable.

 

intelligent design is intuitively perceptible and is not theory.

 

Looking around and saying golly gee does not prove anything. The design might be a result of the laws of physics for all we know (as opposed some Supreme Being waving a wand).    

 

evolution is like saying the materials for a 3-speed racer bike came out of the earth by themselves and fashioned themselves into the finished bike all by themselves.

 

incredible because lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentient of itself.

 

Do you see what you've just done? You made an a ridiculous analogy, then turned right around and agreed with yourself. No one else is suggesting that a 3-speed bike has anything to with Evolution, you are.

 

 intelligent design proposes that all things perceivable were designed and then implemented into reality by an all-encompassing higher power.

 

It's a supposition or a belief system. I don't believe science has anyway to even approach experimentation to prove there is a higher power. That's why these things are of matter of faith, not science.  

 

 why does science reject the existence of spirit? because spirit is not physically discernable, of course.

 

Science does not reject Spirit. And if you're right, that spirit is not tangible, then that's why they have not looked into it. But that's not rejection.   

 

suppose an object were cloaked or hidden behind a false wall and a man or woman is told there is an object at the center of the room. he looks and sees nothing but is assured there is indeed an object within. continuing to see nothing he then asserts that what has been told to him is wrong and mistaken. no object lies within. he or she is then made aware of the false wall and the object hidden behind is revealed and the person becomes dumbfounded because he or she was so sure there was nothing in the room.

 

?

 

for most of my life modern science always kept a healthy open mind to the possible existence of the unfathomable. sadly, liberal scientists and their arrogance has now changed that. they are now sure of what can never be sure.

 

If science (liberal scientist?) felt that the "unfathomable" was measurable from a scientific point of view, they would be all over it. Not looking at it is not a denial, it's just that there is not enough compelling evidence to initiate a scientific inquiry. And that's not arrogance either.

 

Note: There have been studies on whether or not praying for sick people help them get better and they found that there is no improvement among groups where the patients did not know that they were being prayed for (based on statistical norms). In groups that knew, there were a few who improved, attributable to the sugar pill effect of knowing they were being prayed for, it made them feel better knowing that. However, there were others in the group that knew they were being prayed for who got worse because they were upset that they were considered bad enough to have to be prayed for in the first place.

 

..

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Intelligent design was in large part a CYA move after creationism

bit the just as far as being a subject taught in public school. I

remember many years ago someone demonstrating very clearly

how a creationism textbook was refitted to become an intelligent

design one. I enjoy watching religion following in the wake of

science, being forced to change some of religion's theories.

What was usually seen as a 24 hour day became much more

flexible after it became hard to deny that the Earth was not about

6,000 years old. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

intelligent design is intuitively perceptible and is not theory.

 

Looking around and saying golly gee does not prove anything. The design might be a result of the laws of physics for all we know (as opposed some Supreme Being waving a wand).    

 

evolution is like saying the materials for a 3-speed racer bike came out of the earth by themselves and fashioned themselves into the finished bike all by themselves.

 

incredible because lifeless inanimate matter is neither conscious or sentient of itself.

 

Do you see what you've just done? You made an a ridiculous analogy, then turned right around and agreed with yourself. No one else is suggesting that a 3-speed bike has anything to with Evolution, you are.

 

 intelligent design proposes that all things perceivable were designed and then implemented into reality by an all-encompassing higher power.

 

It's a supposition or a belief system. I don't believe science has anyway to even approach experimentation to prove there is a higher power. That's why these things are of matter of faith, not science.  

 

 why does science reject the existence of spirit? because spirit is not physically discernable, of course.

 

Science does not reject Spirit. And if you're right, that spirit is not tangible, then that's why they have not looked into it. But that's not rejection.   

 

suppose an object were cloaked or hidden behind a false wall and a man or woman is told there is an object at the center of the room. he looks and sees nothing but is assured there is indeed an object within. continuing to see nothing he then asserts that what has been told to him is wrong and mistaken. no object lies within. he or she is then made aware of the false wall and the object hidden behind is revealed and the person becomes dumbfounded because he or she was so sure there was nothing in the room.

 

?

 

for most of my life modern science always kept a healthy open mind to the possible existence of the unfathomable. sadly, liberal scientists and their arrogance has now changed that. they are now sure of what can never be sure.

 

If science (liberal scientist?) felt that the "unfathomable" was measurable from a scientific point of view, they would be all over it. Not looking at it is not a denial, it's just that there is not enough compelling evidence to initiate a scientific inquiry. And that's not arrogance either.

 

Note: There have been studies on whether or not praying for sick people help them get better and they found that there is no improvement among groups where the patients did not know that they were being prayed for (based on statistical norms). In groups that knew, there were a few who improved, attributable to the sugar pill effect of knowing they were being prayed for, it made them feel better knowing that. However, there were others in the group that knew they were being prayed for who got worse because they were upset that they were considered bad enough to have to be prayed for in the first place.

 

..

Although I still fall victim, I learned long ago that it is useless to argue with Nipper, Jakie or Movie Moron.

 

Incidentally, the greatest "proof' of the "non-existence" of a "Supreme Being" is the sorry state of mankind, what they do and how they treat each other.  Add in, the horrible diseases that cannot be controlled, weather, etc.  And I'm a Baptist!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I still fall victim, I learned long ago that it is useless to argue with Nipper, Jakie or Movie Moron.

 

You actually got Jake to argue with you? I don't think I've seen him actually respond to another person other than Nippy for over a year, at least.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You actually got Jake to argue with you? I don't think I've seen him actually respond to another person other than Nippy for over a year, at least.

Actually I think you are correct.  I was thinking about my replying to his posts, but then he never replies that I can remember.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...