 sj |
||
|
||
BS: I Love this Idea
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 17 Mar 16 - 04:47 AM Sorry if I have confused you Musket. I think we are all clear that there is such a thing as religion. You and others have pointlessly accused people of faith of having no hard evidence for our belief in God. I agreed that there is none. Steve attacked me for that saying, "There is plenty of evidence for religion, Keith. .... Your penchant for inexactitudes of this sort gets you into trouble." I think he should tell us what evidence he has for the existence of God, unless he is guilty of the "inexactitude" he accuses me of. He also claims that scientists do not believe in Science! If you two include yourselves in that, you presumably do not believe in Big Bang or evolution. Joe and I do. The evidence is so compelling. What is your problem? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 17 Mar 16 - 04:21 AM "Please tell us what evidence you have for religion, as I have none." See? I told you this religion lark was perhaps too complicated for you. Here's a few bits of evidence you can see easily; Go on B&Q website and look for opening hours. Notice that Sundays have fewer hours? Closed on Christmas Day? That's evidence of religion, that is. Now get off your armchair and look out of the window. Can you see any spires or towers? Ok, turn round so you are looking out of the window. That's better. See any? Binoculars may help? Ok, that's better. That's evidence of religion, that is. Now become a volunteer at a semi secure unit and spend time talking to patients about their backgrounds and where the abuse started. Make two lists, one should contain 23% or thereabouts of patients. That's evidence of religion, that is. Now go and reason with the EDL, BNP and UKIP thugs nailing a pig carcass to the door of the local mosque. That's evidence of religion, that is. Pop over to Ireland. Try to find a large house with tall walls. Climb over and have a look in the septic tank. That's evidence of religion, that is. Ok? One last one. Visit the villages in Ethiopia with little water, failing crops, starving goats and a shiny church at one end of the village and a glittering mosque at the other. That's evidence of religion, that is. Just one thing.. I assume you don't need a dictionary to know what "evidence" means? Science relies on evidence too. But unlike religion it doesn't rely on belief. Belief is too irrational a concept for modern science. Sure, you can combine the two in one brain but they only work if kept in separate lobes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 17 Mar 16 - 03:58 AM Steve, There is nothing about evolution, or any other natural phenomenon, that requires the insertion of a God. We all agree on that Steve, so what is your point? Joe, like every other Christian I know other than Pete believe in evolution. You explain to us please what conflict you imagine to exist? And you and Musket should believe in science. If you do not believe in the Big Bang, how do you account for the microwave background? Are you really saying you do not believe in evolution? You should. Variation and inheritance mean that it is inevitable. It must happen. What is not to believe? Not certain obviously. There is no place for certainty in either science or religion. Please also tell us what evidence you have for religion, because I have none. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 17 Mar 16 - 03:43 AM There again, I for one haven't dismissed Joe's creed or position. But when he calls himself a catholic, I take it he means Catholic and not Fred Catholic & Co, Costermongers to the Gentry. You see, this is what happens. I criticise what Vatican spokesmen call the Catholic position. Joe gets shitty and says that doesn't represent his position so stop slagging off Catholics. I suggest that a boutique pick n mix position means I can still slag off the Catholic position so stop getting precious. Joe takes umbrage at being accused of pick n mix. You know, just like Keith, Joe can sometimes use "we" and "they" in the same sentence to mean Christian. Hey Joe! How come Steve's take is one I could, from what I read from him, be comfortable with yet you seem convinced it is because he rejected faith that gives him his view? I have never rejected anything. I haven't been given a choice, have had no family or peer pressure to belong or been remotely curious, other than as a fascinated bystander as to how people can still take the make believe aspects seriously. Not sure your analysis holds? Just saying like., |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 08:53 PM The alternative to the standard model of the universe This is 100 minutes and requires focused attention. What I see are dendrites, neurons , synapses and a brain; A 3 d model of the universe has been derived from actual data and to everyone who sees it from a distant perspective all agree it looks positively organic. To me it resembles Neurons Dendrites and synapses. A living Universe that learns of itself from the very large to very small, from the outside in. While we humans, (made of the stuff in the Universe) are learning of the Universe from the very small to very large, from the inside out. strange science religion bedfellow journey Note to Joe I have gone back and read the religious posts I had skipped. Between eye problems and difficulty reading I must admit I do see your fair minded thoughts and apologize for my knee jerk blindness to the posts I was presumptuously judging as same old stuff. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 07:43 PM I don't present definitions of your religion or anyone else's. You characterise your own faith in your own way and that is what I go on. Whatever diversionary tactics you wish to employ, it still comes down to a belief system that is, to rational people who base their notions on evidence and reason, delusional and completely inadequate for explaining anything, let alone revealing of what is really true. You can't help that. It doesn't matter what version of God appeals to you most. The problem is with God, not the version. It isn't the different theistic perspectives that are the sticking point. It's the fact that they are theistic. To me, theistic equals invalid. Why? Because I want the evidence that you haven't got. Note, that you haven't got, not what you can't provide or articulate. You simply haven't got it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 07:22 PM No, Donuel, I do not know your religious education, or anything about your wedding. And yes, there's quite a difference between "God like" and "God lie." So I didn't understand your post completely because of that. And I have no desire to wage war with anyone here. I merely wish to be tolerated and accepted, and not redefined into something I am not. And if I am not tolerated, then I speak out. You have a problem with that? And by the way, I agree with everything said on the podcast, and found it very interesting. -Joe Offer- And here's the link to Studio 360. I believe the name of the podcast is called "Do Animals Have Culture?" - correct me if I'm wrong. Here's the link: And here's an alternate link, if that one is a problem:Do I have the podcast program name right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 07:08 PM "GOD like not god lie." for what ever reason you have a **** ** regarding my religious education, I can never change your mind. I don't want to. If you could answer one question please answer "How dare you Donuel for ..........?" You sometimes decide I deserve your ire. Being who I am, I can't change your mind. it seems as impossible as teaching satire to a fundamentalist Taliban who thinks a joke is anathema deserving a stoning of the comedian. My high horse is no higher than your participation in high jacking every thread I start about gravity waves or advanced genetics cosmology, the queen of science, with the same ol oppositional explorations of religion. Way off topic dude. Despite your animosity at times I will always appreciate the dedication, the hours, the frustration and cooperation of building something real, MUdcat Or do you not know my religious education? Do you know who presided at our wedding? I know; Without religion there is no JS Bach or lots of beautiful experiences and healing. I do not even mention the other side of the coin. In conclusion I am happy as a nobody. If you need to be angry at a nobody sometimes, fine. It might be fun. Just don't stay mad That would be boring. PS the blue clicky link seems to broken the last couple trys |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 07:06 PM Steve, you were brought up with a theistic perspective that didn't satisfy you, and you rejected it. I respect you for doing that. I was brought up with a theistic perspective that DID satisfy me, and I built on it and made it my own. Mine fits very well with science and evolution and homosexuality and any number of things that you also find important. I'm sure I rejected many concepts that you also rejected (like sappy poetry, for instance), but I found a way of thinking that is satisfying to me. Did it ever occur to you that your left-behind theistic perspective and my current one, might be quite different? You and Musket and Donuel and raggytash and so many others present a definition of religion that is nothing at all like the religious faith I practice. If religion were like what you define, I wouldn't want it, either. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 06:45 PM There is plenty of evidence for religion, Keith. And scientists don't believe in science. Your penchant for inexactitudes of this sort gets you into trouble. Remember the Wheatcroft fiasco? And you could pick on far less benign targets than Donuel, Joe. He's had me looking stuff up a few times lately. And making me laugh. I can take that in this vale of tears in which we find ourselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 06:35 PM "I've considered evolution from a theist and from a non-theist perspective, and most things come out more-or-less the same." This is possible only if you don't understand evolution, which you have demonstrated time and time again that you don't. There is no way of properly considering evolution from a theistic perspective. There is nothing about evolution, or any other natural phenomenon, that requires the insertion of a God. Everything can be explained in terms of normal laws of nature and there has never been the slightest hint that the things we have yet to explain will be any different. All you're doing is trying to justify your unfounded belief in God by manufacturing a false reconciliation with science. At best it's deluded, at worst it's downright dishonest. " From my theistic perspective, I see a unifying essence within and beyond all things, " I'll be kind and not say that this is dreamy, cloudy, meaningless gibberish. I've tried to explain that evolution cannot have a unifying essence, a divine (or non-divine) driver, a kick-starter, an underlying sense of direction, a quest for greater complexity or perfection or a designer. The phenomenon of evolution is innocent of all these notions, and with any one of them on board the whole thing would be turned on its head. " I've also considered evolution from a more purely rational and scientific perspective. I find that's a very good way to root my perspective in reality, but it takes the poetry out of it all" Well what actually takes the poetry out of it all is the dereliction of intellect and imagination that goes hand in glove with your Godly "perspective." The natural world is amazing enough in its diversity, complexity and beauty, there for us to study for what it is and to inspire our highest flights of imagination, spawning the finest poetry, music and art there has ever been, not there for us to superimpose an undemonstrable, dismal, infantilising gloss. What is so amazing is its beautiful normality and the way it keeps faith unfailingly with the laws of nature. To try to explain it in any other fashion, without evidence, is to insult it. I don't know why anyone would even want to try. If you really can't see beauty and poetry in science then you're not seeing science at all. Poems are made by fools like me but only God can make a tree. I can live without that sort of poetry, thanks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 05:38 PM Donuel says: Now repeat yourself for an eternity as God has ordered you Pssst there is some mind blowing science hidden here in my posts that the religious would hail as God lie. but their faith to not look may be too strong Yes, there is some mind blowing science here, Donuel. It is very interesting and very valuable to study the aesthetic perspective of animals, as I said in my post at 2:53 PM, in an attempt to bring it all together. A great number of religious people can appreciate it and accept it fully. Therefore, there was no reason for anyone to bring anti-religious bigotry into play in this thread - and then to expect religious people not to have the right to respond. So, get off your anti-religious high horse and talk about what you say you want to talk about, already. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 04:11 PM Good, duly noted. Now repeat yourself for an eternity as God has ordered you Pssst there is some mind blowing science hidden here in my posts that the religious would hail as God lie. but their faith to not look may be too strong shhh |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:52 PM No. I don't believe in science at all. I accept the scientific approach though and I accept explanations with the caveat that they may be updated at some point. Belief is too stifling a concept for an inquisitive mind. It's best served by shut minds. If you don't believe the stuff, why did you post a script for some of the mumbo jumbo when I said you can stand there in front of the vicar but you don't actually have to listen to it? Why did you do that Keith? If you dismiss the "truth" bit the same as normal rational people? Do you have principles or do they take second place to trying to make others look twats? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 02:53 PM Shimrod quotes Joe: "I think it's far better to consider things from a variety of perspectives, even from various religious perspectives. If we look at things from various directions, we're far more likely to come up with a valid approximation of reality." Shimrod responds: I'm not sure that that is true. Can you give us any examples where "considering things from a variety of perspectives" has worked? Well, Shimrod poses climate change as an example, and I think I could add evolution as a similar example. And yeah, my principle doesn't work the same way when the other party's perspective is the denial of something I know to be a reality. But in that case, the other party's position is the denial of the possibility of discussion or common ground. So, in that case, mutually-respectful consideration is impossible. Still, the other party is most likely a voting citizen, and it behooves me to understand the others point of view and not refute him/her too strongly if I'm going to need his vote or need to form an alliance with him. It may well be smart to avoid discussing climate change or evolution with that party, unless there's a real need for his denial to be refuted. I can have a really good time singing with evolution deniers if I don't fight them on that topic. But if I do battle with them, it makes it hard to sing together. So...is the battle worth it? But many of us religious people accept the theory of evolution, even though some may say our acceptance of evolution is not valid because we don't abandon our ideas about God. I dunno. I've considered evolution from a theist and from a non-theist perspective, and most things come out more-or-less the same. From my theistic perspective, I see a unifying essence within and beyond all things, and I ponder that and find myself taken to exploring a wide range of possibilities. I've also considered evolution from a more purely rational and scientific perspective. I find that's a very good way to root my perspective in reality, but it takes the poetry out of it all, and I get a lot of appreciation and enjoyment out of those broadened perspective. So, let's take a flower. If we look at it from a scientific perspective, we can photograph it, dissect it, or maybe eat it. But we could also look at that flower from the broad variety of perspectives of various artists and philosophers and poets and musicians - most of which may not be scientifically accurate. Nonetheless, they can be very rich and rewarding to me. Or maybe I could look at the flower from an Islamic perspective, and wonder about how that flower inspires Islamic art and poetry and music and architecture and mathematics - all in ways that are very foreign to me, but very worthwhile. Or, as suggested by the first post in this thread, I can attempt to consider the flower from the perspectives of various animals - and each attempt to see through those other perspectives will deepen my appreciation of that flower. So, yeah, I can see value in considering things from many perspectives, even though I may not consider those perspectives to be completely valid. And in the process, I gain respect for the other being, and I believe that respect makes this world a better place for us all to live in - even if we all don't come up with the same answers to the questions. Up above, Donuel suggests that I consider the perspective of Gaia, and I have dabbled in that and found it worthwhile. I like the idea of a feminine deity, and the unifying principles and earth-based spirituality that follow. But it's not where I come from, so it doesn't feel right to be my primary perspective. Still, I see a lot of value in it, and it is popular in some spheres. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 16 Mar 16 - 02:50 PM Why do so many of you keep pointing out that there is no evidence for religion? We all knew that, especially us with faith. No-one is claiming evidence for religion! OK? Musket, I am surprised you do not believe in science. You should. It can answer most of the questions about life, the universe and everything. I believe in the Big Bang. Don't you? I believe in evolution. Don't you? You should. The evidence is very compelling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 02:47 PM For over 10 years an electric theory has become intertwined with field theory and is beginning to out shine General Relativity regarding matter. Why should matter curve space/ FIND OUT Here. Did you ever see the big scar on Mars? It was not carved by water alone but a cosmic plasma lightening bolt. Some of the plasma events in the universe were seen by our ancestors. They depicted them all over the world. This theory is as novel black holes were 50 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA&ebc=ANyPxKqCXSjQzHY6s3q0MwyJJaxH7UwQm6GL0nFSPxn2oM0wgdI42KkgK35irQhww1s-FPjeKClhAnMSAPFWibyNSOno2_yLug |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 02:04 PM grammar said that not me :0) One of the ideas that I love the most could give Joe an epiphany and me a nerd orgasm at the same time. (did I just have sex with Joe?) No? good. Anyway A 3 d model of the universe has been derived from actual data and to everyone who sees it from a distant perspective all agree it looks positively organic. To me it resembles Neurons Dendrites and synapses. A living Universe that learns of itself from the very large to very small, from the outside in. While we humans, (made of the stuff in the Universe) are learning of the Universe from the very small to very large, from the inside out. Johnathon Swift should have seen this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJpC_oQQxPI Now to practice some music |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 01:15 PM So I'm not overweight after all. Bloody hitch-hikers. A virus makes copies of itself, not the cell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 01:08 PM The amount of DNA that does not apply to us weighs in the micrograms but bacteria WHOA we can have twenty pounds of bacteria microphages and creepy crawlers that are part of an ecosystem we call our bodies. Maybe even more than 20 pounds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 01:05 PM The same mechanism a virus uses to use a molecular key to open a door into a cell in hopes to hijack cell processes to grow copies of a cell. In DNA there are no such mitochondrial factories so maybe only a segment of only a few AGT or C sequences replace original code, do not get reproduced but stored and copied to the warehouse to one day get replaced by another segment 200 years later. In short a bit of DNA hitch hikes on a virus. Maybe it only replaces DNA that is already in the junk warehouse section of our genome. Otherwise it will be corrected by RNA matching code correction. Answers to this question is beyond me but what experts are probably looking for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 11:23 AM How does it get into us to become an integral part of the genome? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 10:54 AM The question of what is the purpose of trans posons, comes to bear. Who benefits? By rubbing shoulders with fragmentary DNA may be a help to our immune system over time. Just as likely it may harm our immune system. If it helps change our partial exposure to harmful virus' the process might work something like an elemental vaccine? That's all that comes to mind right now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 10:36 AM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjzQXq4Tj40 Here is a link to a TV program that includes names of researchers' names. While the show is aimed at amateur consumers of science the treatment of the subject is not too dumbed down. It is dumbed down just enough for me. Current research at Genomics Inc and NIH grant recipients into the influence of outside DNA on a genome is currently underway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 09:59 AM Now that makes much more sense. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 16 Mar 16 - 09:55 AM Joe there are no attackers.* There are no men of malice, just semi silly academic comedians who spend an inordinate amount of time trying to fill a lonely hole in their lives with amusement. What is wrong with that. Whatever rewards they feel from their contributions should be celebrated not condemned or attacked. life is short JOE. I hope you spend all the time you want anyway you really want. btw I know you are not recused of being able to use your editing tools. *I am not saying their are no people with evil in their hearts. The truly harmful actors capable of financial criminality or misplaced revenge thoughts have bigger fish to fry and hack.. Yes Keith, That IS why they call it THE CHRIST STORY instead of THE CHRIST EVIDENCE. Plot of a genetic sci fi Using CRSPR all the trans poson DNA is removed from one subject and combined with all the 'junk DNA" of another and the first trans galaxian is born with technical memory intact. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 09:48 AM I think you're investing transposing DNA with a little too much mystery and romance, Donuel, by calling it "alien". Surprising, unexpected, blowing an idea or two out of the water maybe, which is what makes science so delicious. An extra thing to try to grapple with and explain. I'd like to hear more about this notion of amassing/absorbing DNA which we can then pass on... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 16 Mar 16 - 09:42 AM "Confronting me (literally) was a rather unattractive concrete church building (not all our villages are chocolate-box material) with a twenty-five foot high blank crucifix painted on it with the words BAPTIST CHURCH writ large underneath." In the northern British city in which I live there's a somewhat deprived suburb and in the midst of it there's an enormous Catholic monastery. In the 19th century, when the monastery was built, the suburb was even more deprived and the Church appeared to be saying to the suburb's struggling inhabitants: "We don't care about your temporal sufferings - it's your immortal souls we're interested in." Or perhaps they were really saying: "F**k you, you 'losers, we've got all this money and we're going to spend it ALL on this huge gothic monstrosity!" During the latter half of the 20th century, the gothic monstrosity fell into disrepair (perhaps the Church lost interest?) and then was declared a 'World Heritage Site' (or something) and was 'saved' for the nation; now it's a concert venue. Personally, I would have blown it up - for a start, I really hate Victorian gothic brick churches! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 16 Mar 16 - 06:48 AM Err.. No Keith. I don't "believe" in science. The term sounds like something one of pete's "evolutionary scientists" would come out with. Science is discovery. You take as a fact till it is satisfactorily challenged and then see how that impacts any other hypothesis. Belief is the art of hampering the scientific process. Compare the two conversations; Musket to vicar. " It seems to be rather established that the earth is older than the bible says, that virgins don't drop kids, that you don't come back to life when dead etc etc. Vicar to Musket. "Blasphemy!" Or... Vicar to Musket. "I read your thesis and noted that one of the key elements you based your main formula on has subsequently been challenged and some modelling devised by a university in The States suggests the relationship is only logarithmic within certain parameters and gravity plays an increasing role at outer perimeters of your model. Musket to vicar. "Wow! That's great! Have you got their details? I'd like to write a revised paper." (That's Musket by the way, not me. My MD is safe because it was purely research. Musket was telling me his doctoral thesis has had a battering in recent years and he was even on the viva panel of one student who challenged his earlier conclusion.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 16 Mar 16 - 06:42 AM That's very good, Shimrod. I see a number of parallels with religion and climate change denial. The deniers are wanting us to see things "from a different perspective." Religionists, same thing. The deniers have no evidence. God-fearers have no evidence. The deniers have ulterior motives in that they are generally in the pockets of oil companies, etc. Individual believers may or may not have ulterior motives (a bit of insurance, scared that granny might disinherit them if the kids aren't baptised, the Catholic school down the road has the "best reputation", that sort of thing), though many are just genuinely deluded. But big religion definitely has ulterior motives, mainly involving the deployment of instruments of control (lots of rules about your sex life, threats of hellfire apropos of the sin list they've carefully constructed, ostracism or death threats for apostasy, etc.). Deniers make a superficially attractive case by making you feel comfortable about your energy-gobbling car and air conditioning system, religion gives us fine music, art and architecture (and you won't find me denying that. I've just listened to a wonderful recording of Michael Haydn's Requiem, for example). Climate change deniers haven't quite succeeded as yet in making their delusion the default position, unlike religion. I drove through a Cornish village the other day. Confronting me (literally) was a rather unattractive concrete church building (not all our villages are chocolate-box material) with a twenty-five foot high blank crucifix painted on it with the words BAPTIST CHURCH writ large underneath. Such nonsense is the norm in "Christian" countries, of course. We're so used to these monstrosities that we're resigned to seeing them everywhere and just shrugging. A complacent attitude well worth avoiding, both with religion and climate change deniers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:53 AM Going back to one of the things that you wrote on the 15th March, Joe: "I think it's far better to consider things from a variety of perspectives, even from various religious perspectives. If we look at things from various directions, we're far more likely to come up with a valid approximation of reality." I'm not sure that that is true. Can you give us any examples where "considering things from a variety of perspectives" has worked? The media, both in the US and the UK, are a bit obsessed with even handedness. There was a very perceptive article in the UK newspaper, the 'Independent', the other day, in which the opinion was expressed that the BBC's "two sides to every story" policy means that very few meaningful opinions are expressed at all. We've got a referendum coming up soon about whether or not the UK should remain in the European Union. How should I, or any other British citizen, vote? If I relied solely on the BBC, I wouldn't have a clue! Then there's Naomi Klein's brilliant recent book, 'This Changes Everything' about anthropogenic climate change. She points out that the media have tended to give equal weight to those (97% of climate scientists) who have mountains of scientific evidence to show that climate change is happening and 'climate change sceptics'. As the latter are largely people who profit from extracting and burning fossil fuels she asks if they really should be given equal air-time? She thinks not - given the dire consequences of climate change - and I agree with her. And should people who are aspiring to high office be allowed to preach hatred? Perhaps they should be made to keep their obnoxious opinions to themselves. And back to religion. Are there really two sides to the question of religion? Well, at the very least, religion should not be exempt from criticism (as it has been for centuries). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:50 AM Musket sez: The concepts of religion are purely tradition and ritual. Truth isn't even on the sub bench. Joe sez: So, you got tradition, ritual, and truth. What's wrong with two outa three? To my mind, it is absolutely essential that faith be combined with having an open mind (AND a sense of humor, and can we throw in poetry along with it?). Otherwise, faith becomes poison. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:49 AM Of course I believe in science. It is based on hard evidence. Do you disbelieve in science Musket? I have had a long career as a science teacher and was known for my enthusiasm for the subject. Astronomy has been my hobby since I was a small boy. My knowledge of science is extensive, and none of it conflicts with my faith. Donuel, Science trumps religion That has been claimed here, but it does not. or religion trumps science. No-one has claimed that at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:30 AM Ah but it isn't about knowing or thinking you know truth. It's purely saying that unless and until someone has evidence to show me, the concepts of religion are purely tradition and ritual. Truth isn't even on the sub bench. Having an open mind and exhibiting faith aren't exactly bedfellows, are they? No matter. It's just that I'm obviously not capable. After all, one minute Keith is posting the words vicars use at christenings at me, the next he is saying he "believes" science. Presumably the ritual quotes he threw at me weren't from Genesis then.. Oh.. Err yeah. Donuel? Wot Joe said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 16 Mar 16 - 03:07 AM Ah, but you're different, Musket, far more difficult to define succinctly. In fact, there's an understanding at Mudcat that at least some of the time, there has been a Musket Trinity, three persons in one Musket. I, too, am similar, since sometimes I'm an atheist or at least agnostic, often Buddhist, and sometimes Islamic. I suppose, though, that I'm always a Catholic agnostic, a Catholic Buddhist, or a Catholic Muslim. I think it might be best to define Joe Offer as "All Things Considered," but always interested in justice and fairplay and rooted in Catholic tradition (if not ideology). I think it's far better to consider questions, rather than to paint groups of people with a broad brush and predict their perceptions by the labels we've give them. Still, Mr. Shaw, the one-time Catholic who probably once fit the conservative definition of Catholic far better than I ever have, seem to fall right smack dab in the middle of the "mindless absolutist antitheist" category. The man knows no middle ground. I think I'd prefer to continue to consider all things with an open mind, and not bother holding on too tightly to any one definition of "Truth." -Joe- Sorry, Donuel. I know you want to control this thread, but Musket posed the question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 16 Mar 16 - 02:56 AM And yet Joe.. You tar people with a convenient brush, in the manner of an absolutist yourself. If you read what I put (and of the three of us, I seem to have the religion v reality portfolio) I do admire tradition. I did have my children christened, half through tradition and half through buying them a ticket in advance should they reason as adults that religion is something they would like to get into. (Result? Further evidence that if you weren't brainwashed as a child, you have no use for it as an adult.) I do keep comparing it with my Sheffield Wednesday faith. Steve is fundamentally wrong though in saying he could take you to Hillsborough to see them lose. They never lose, you see. Occasionally the league moves in mysterious ways but we never lose, we never lose the faith. It's through the fact that I could never support a different team, that it was so ingrained in me as a child that I actually do understand why people turn to a fantasy construct. Ok, Sheffield Wednesday are worthy of praise but that's another matter. You see Joe, you confuse dismissal of the aims of organisations using people's vulnerability as a tool with what you call absolutist. Not thinking Harry Potter is real doesn't make me an absolutist. I don't think The X Files are telling us something through drama. That doesn't make me an absolutist either. So why does dismissing the concept of another man made invention make those who fall for it call normal people absolutists? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Mar 16 - 10:21 PM Sorry, Donuel. I didn't mean to get off the subject. But when intolerance was expressed a few too many times, I felt a need to speak up. Why is it you didn't speak up about that? Perhaps, Donuel, you should focus your attention on the attackers, not on those who are attacked. If it weren't for those who feel compelled to attack and ridicule believers, you'd see very little about religion on Mudcat. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Mar 16 - 09:56 PM "And Steve Shaw has said the same thing time and time again, although no doubt he'll deny it" No doubt my arse. I have said the same thing and I won't deny it. Why should I. It's fine for you to harbour whatever delusions you like. I've illustrated Musket's Owls delusion time and time again. He's illustrated his delusion that I have a Liverpool delusion time and time again. Delusions make us human, not Vulcans. It's also fine to tell your kids about your delusions. But you tell your kids that your delusions contain deeper truths. You've told us that too, and you back it up by telling us how long you studied in a seminary. You send them to schools to sit in classrooms under crucifixes where they will be made to say daily prayers which are replete with bogus certainties. That school will herd your children off to services at which your delusions will be asserted as truths. You will do the same thing yourself on Sundays, justifying the practice by convincing yourself that you are involving them in a worthwhile community of people whose common characteristic is that they all harbour the same delusion as you. You will have had them "christened" whilst still tiny babies, so that you can call them "Catholic children." "Catholic children." What an obscenity. And if you don't do this with your children, almost none of them would ever sign up later as Catholics. Which is why you do it. The only way the Catholic Church, or any other religion for that matter, can survive is by signing up children before they're old enough to make up their own minds. I suppose seminaries are too busy with theology to tell you that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 15 Mar 16 - 09:23 PM Joe please attend your religious convention and take care of those souls. I don't see a single idea you love except for the same old Christ Story. Old story, been there done that. Go make your own Christ Story thread Now for those who might want to learn a new story stick around. 15 years ago when the human genome was well known we saw all this extra DNA and called it "junk DNA" We didn't really think it was garbage. I used to think it could be instructions to build highly complex proteins. DNA is basically a twisted 2 dimensional construct but proteins are 3 dimensional. The steps to make a protein is wicked hard. The alien DNA we pick up on the road of life is one of the real mysteries some of you who study may someday solve. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Mar 16 - 09:01 PM Yes, Steve, I suppose I know a few Catholics who shove their religion down their children's throats, more-or-less. A very few. It's not really a common practice, but you certainly make it seem so. If that's what your parents did to you, then I feel sorry for you. Rest assured that most Catholic parents don't do that, not even in countries you consider to be inferior to yours. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Mar 16 - 08:55 PM Shimrod says: I would only "condemn" the religious if they attempted to indoctrinate others - particularly children. And Steve Shaw has said the same thing time and time again, although no doubt he'll deny it. Can't remember what Musket and raggytash and Jim Carroll and others have said about religious people bringing up their kids in a religious tradition. But does it make sense to demand that parents NOT bring their children up according to their own family traditions? Must I be restricted from telling my kids what and how I'm thinking, lest I pollute their fragile minds? But maybe religion isn't primarily indoctrination. Maybe it's a culture, a perspective, a way of looking at things. and maybe, just maybe, religious people can be every bit as intelligent and independent-thinking as those who don't practice a religion. I think the flaw is in the knee-jerk compulsion to condemn. And once again, I must say I find it interesting how this trait is common to our born-again religious people, and those atheists whose compulsion is to attack religious belief. I don't ask anyone to become a Christian - I never have, and I never would. I do ask for tolerance and a modicum of respect. Both are sadly lacking here. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Steve Shaw Date: 15 Mar 16 - 08:25 PM "There are so many similarities between them and those I call "born-again atheists," who are also cocksure that they're right and others are wrong. Both are quick to condemn; and it almost seems that their primary focus in life is condemn others" You're a bitter man, Joe. If ever I came across any atheist who was cocksure that he was right, I'd laugh out loud in his face. If I ever met an atheist who condemns you for what you believe, the same. Musket, idiotically, supports Sheffield Wednesday. The point is that he doesn't thrust Sheffield Wednesday down your throat, make children sit under their club logo and say prayers to their goalkeeper, make them attend Sheffield Wednesday rallies every week, promote them with graven images on public buildings in every town and city in the country. Yet, Sheffield Wednesday are real. They actually exist. I can prove it. I could show you their ground or take you to see them lose one of their games (heaven forfend...). Spot the difference... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 15 Mar 16 - 06:16 PM In response to my 'definition' of faith (what did I miss out?) Joe Offer says: " ... I'd be a fool to accept a definition of faith from somebody intent on refuting it. I also don't accept definitions of faith from extremist religious people who are cocksure that they're the only ones who possess the truth. There are so many similarities between them and those I call "born-again atheists," who are also cocksure that they're right and others are wrong. Both are quick to condemn; and it almost seems that their primary focus in life is condemn others." First, I wouldn't describe myself as "cocksure" - I'm a sceptic. Second, I'm not a "born again atheist" - I never considered myself to be either religious or a Christian in the first place. I've never understood the attraction of religion and am equally puzzled as to why others are attracted to it. Adults tried to indoctrinate me with religious claptrap when I was a child ... but they failed and when I became an adult, I dropped religion completely and have never looked back. Finally, I would only "condemn" the religious if they attempted to indoctrinate others - particularly children. As I see it, the world has been in thrall to religion for centuries. Even in my lifetime, when someone claimed that they had faith and believed in this and that and mouthed pieties, one was supposed to shuffle one's feet and bow one's head and look all solemn and reverent. Not any more! Enough! The world is sliding into chaos through conflict, climate change, biodiversity loss and environmental degradation. Religion won't help us - we need to find ways to deal with reality as it actually is! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 15 Mar 16 - 03:26 PM Trump think; Makes America GRATE again. Illegitimi Americus carborundum infiniti |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: keberoxu Date: 15 Mar 16 - 03:06 PM My heart goes out to you, Donuel. You are not afraid to post your poetry on the forum. You are braver than I, who stop to think carefully before posting a translation of someone else's song lyrics/poetry on the forum. You start a thread called, I Love this idea, and you-know-who-ses renew their ongoing compulsion to worry words about. Never change. Illegitimi non carborundum. And all that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Joe Offer Date: 15 Mar 16 - 02:55 PM Shimrod says: religious faith is the fervent and unquestioning belief in something invisible for the existence of which there's no evidence - the very antithesis of science. Well then, that's settled. I guess I don't have faith. Either that, or perhaps I'd be a fool to accept a definition of faith from somebody intent on refuting it. I also don't accept definitions of faith from extremist religious people who are cocksure that they're the only ones who possess the truth. There are so many similarities between them and those I call "born-again atheists," who are also cocksure that they're right and others are wrong. Both are quick to condemn; and it almost seems that their primary focus in life is condemn others. I guess I just don't understand what's behind those who are so driven to ridicule, redefine, and condemn any way of thinking that is not their own. It's dangerous to think in absolutes, no matter what school of thought one espouses - even science. Believe it or no, science has failed us before - remember eugenics? I think it's far better to consider things from a variety of perspectives, even from various religious perspectives. If we look at things from various directions, we're far more likely to come up with a valid approximation of reality. For years, I've called myself a "radical moderate." I try to consider all perspectives respectfully - and that means that NOBODY ever sees things my way. I find that both atheist and religious extremists constantly redefine and ridicule what I have to say. Musket calls me a "boutique Christian," and neoconservative Catholics call me a "Cafeteria Catholic." Note the similarity - both sides can see only absolutes. But back to the first post - I had a little trouble figuring out which podcast Donuel was referring to, since there are several on the link - http://www.npr.org/podcasts/381444899/pri-studio-360. I guess it's the Studio 360 podcast titled "Do Animals Have Culture?" The program explores the question whether animals make aesthetic judgments and do things for purely aesthetic reasons. Some, no doubt, will ridicule those who would pose this question, saying that to do so is to anthropomorphize animals. I think some of our Mudcat absolutists are afraid to anthropomorphize humans, denying the value of any human endeavor that cannot be defined in their pseudo-scientific terms. I think we're far better off to consider all things, not closing ourselves off to any attempt to pursue any question. Of course it's important to consider aesthetics from a scientific perspective, but let's remember that science is only one of many valid perspectives. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Donuel Date: 15 Mar 16 - 02:07 PM There are only two subjects to blurt about here anymore 1 The extremely silly 2 Science trumps religion or religion trumps science. You guys or gals remind me of a Christian Taliban. no ungodly science teachin allowed. I don't heckle your church service You needn't disallow ideas You may discover you are just an idea, an algorhythm,programed to repeat and die. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Musket Date: 15 Mar 16 - 01:54 PM "Believe in science.." 😹😹 And you reckon you used to teach the bloody thing???? Seems that if, as you say, you can be rational and claim to be religious, then saying I'm a hypocrit for getting my kids christened for the tradition and ignoring the words fits in with your own outlook. Nice to see you describe yourself as a hypocrit Keith. I'd ask for an apology but there again... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Mar 16 - 01:43 PM What case? No-one disputes it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: I Love this Idea From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 15 Mar 16 - 12:53 PM "Science requires evidence, but religion does not." I rest my case. |
