Author Topic: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1  (Read 14668 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #174 on: June 18, 2013, 08:58:37 AM »

God is interested in all humans being with Him. 

...

Should God visit with those who reject him?   How would that benefit them?  They would hate it.
For God to bring those who reject Him into heaven.....well.....would that be like Hell ...or worse? 

Worse than Hell......Is that what you want for those who reject God?  Isn't Hell lonely enough without
a deity you don't trust hanging around?

Interesting that your God, though interested in our salvation, is powerless to convert us. For an omnipotent being, he is somewhat lacking.

Were there actually a deity, at least the issue wouldn't be one of belief. But it is. The deity we dislike is the one invented by humans. The one that is ridiculous in every aspect and non-existent. So when we are attacking your god, what we are really attacking is the ridiculous concept and the inhumanity built into him by his creators: i.e., humans.

Omnipotent powers don't require, let alone bother with, being fickle, angry, impatient, cruel or missing.


If you read it closely, over time you learn that many of those attributes are not actually divine revelation about what God is like, but are documented reactions by people.

On youtube there are vidios, and there are reaction vidieos, occasionally videos of people's reactions as they watch the original video.

The Bible is like that.  ALL of the descriptions are human reactions to God.   We never get to see Him directly.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #175 on: June 18, 2013, 09:03:06 AM »
Interesting that your God, though interested in our salvation, is powerless to convert us. For an omnipotent being, he is somewhat lacking.

He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12577
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #176 on: June 18, 2013, 09:18:46 AM »
He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

Yeah, sure he is.  Says you.  You're talking out your ass. 
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6627
  • Darwins +796/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #177 on: June 18, 2013, 09:34:57 AM »
If you read it closely, over time you learn that many of those attributes are not actually divine revelation about what God is like, but are documented reactions by people.

On youtube there are vidios, and there are reaction vidieos, occasionally videos of people's reactions as they watch the original video.

The Bible is like that.  ALL of the descriptions are human reactions to God.   We never get to see Him directly.

So: Garden of Eden? Actual, or a human reaction? The flood story? Actual, or a human reaction to a wet weekend? Jesus? Actual or a human reaction to someone who happened to be charismatic but otherwise normal?

What value is there in reading closely (something you've asked me to do) the far from inerrant tales told by people as they reacted inaccurately/wrongly/incompently to your god?

How do you know he wants to be worshipped? The only source for that claim is written by humans. How do you  know he wants our love and adoration? The only source for that claim is from humans. How do you know he really sent his kid to save us if the only source for that story is from humans?

Of course, you used the word "many", which means that you get to leaf through the pages of the bible and say "yep, nope, nope, yep, nope, yep" to the various passages, because your electrons orbits touched by god just a little bit better than anyone else's. He loves us all, but you a bit better, apparently. Because you've got it right. You know. Insight is your middle name.

Your time might be better served by going to christian sites and straightening them out first. Then, once you've consolidated all religious thought into one coherent mass (which should be easy, given the power of your insights, etc.), you could come back here and tell us what you've done to change religion to make is both workable and believable, and hell, I'm pretty sure you'd be much more effective, because you'd have impressive bona fides and everything.

Or you can stay here and continue the biblical tradition of misinterpreting everything, the tradition of assuming that you, and only you, know the truth, the tradition of picking the stuff you like on a whim, and hope that somehow you can somehow manage to change people who think into people who don't.

Not much of a goal, but hey, have at it.

P.S. Notice how nice I was not asking you to clarify what you meant by "(cloud)" in your electron comment. So that's one less thing you'll have to make up today. Thank me later.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #178 on: June 18, 2013, 12:37:37 PM »

God is interested in all humans being with Him.  Keeping all humans alive
for eternity on earth is the priority of healthcare workers alone.  God does not keep the same priorities.

Children are much more adaptable to new environments than cranky old people so if God takes children
out of this world, it's better for them than us adults.

Yes, God loves his children no matter what they do.  God forgives every sin except for rejection of the Holy Spirit.
Those who reject the Holy Spirit end up without.   Being without God on earth is one thing.  Being without God
AND not having "the world" is Hell.   How would God provide a good situation for non-believers?

Should God visit with those who reject him?   How would that benefit them?  They would hate it.
For God to bring those who reject Him into heaven.....well.....would that be like Hell ...or worse? 

Worse than Hell......Is that what you want for those who reject God?  Isn't Hell lonely enough without
a deity you don't trust hanging around?

SPAG
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #179 on: June 18, 2013, 12:41:22 PM »

If you read it closely, over time you learn that many of those attributes are not actually divine revelation about what God is like, but are documented reactions by people.

On youtube there are vidios, and there are reaction vidieos, occasionally videos of people's reactions as they watch the original video.

The Bible is like that.  ALL of the descriptions are human reactions to God.   We never get to see Him directly.

And how exactly do you know this? You do know that the majority of professing Christians disagree with you on your interpretation here, right? So too with the early Christians. So from our seats, it's quite funny.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #180 on: June 18, 2013, 12:43:00 PM »

He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

You mean like the magic Unicorns that created everything 5 seconds ago and control your thoughts? How is your claim any different from pure superstition?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3049
  • Darwins +271/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #181 on: June 18, 2013, 02:29:43 PM »
He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

Yeah, sure he is.  Says you.  You're talking out your ass.

We really have to get WWGHA its own subscription to Journal of Argumenta Ex Rectum.

And why am I getting a vision of Biblegod swearing up a blue streak and sucking on a scorched thumb after the Large Hadron Collider splattered a few of those atoms?   ;D
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #182 on: June 18, 2013, 04:45:14 PM »
He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

Yeah, sure he is.  Says you.  You're talking out your ass.

We really have to get WWGHA its own subscription to Journal of Argumenta Ex Rectum.

And why am I getting a vision of Biblegod swearing up a blue streak and sucking on a scorched thumb after the Large Hadron Collider splattered a few of those atoms?   ;D


Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #183 on: June 18, 2013, 04:47:58 PM »

He's holding each electron in it's orbit (cloud) for your benefit.   
While you decide.

You mean like the magic Unicorns that created everything 5 seconds ago and control your thoughts? How is your claim any different from pure superstition?

It is guided theory.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #184 on: June 18, 2013, 05:06:18 PM »

God is interested in all humans being with Him.  Keeping all humans alive
for eternity on earth is the priority of healthcare workers alone.  God does not keep the same priorities.

Children are much more adaptable to new environments than cranky old people so if God takes children
out of this world, it's better for them than us adults.

Yes, God loves his children no matter what they do.  God forgives every sin except for rejection of the Holy Spirit.
Those who reject the Holy Spirit end up without.   Being without God on earth is one thing.  Being without God
AND not having "the world" is Hell.   How would God provide a good situation for non-believers?

Should God visit with those who reject him?   How would that benefit them?  They would hate it.
For God to bring those who reject Him into heaven.....well.....would that be like Hell ...or worse? 

Worse than Hell......Is that what you want for those who reject God?  Isn't Hell lonely enough without
a deity you don't trust hanging around?

SPAG

My spell check says I should have separated heath and care.
Grammar check turns up nothing.
Perhaps you didn't like the content.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #185 on: June 18, 2013, 05:13:48 PM »
If you read it closely, over time you learn that many of those attributes are not actually divine revelation about what God is like, but are documented reactions by people.

On youtube there are vidios, and there are reaction vidieos, occasionally videos of people's reactions as they watch the original video.

The Bible is like that.  ALL of the descriptions are human reactions to God.   We never get to see Him directly.

So: Garden of Eden? Actual, or a human reaction? The flood story? Actual, or a human reaction to a wet weekend? Jesus? Actual or a human reaction to someone who happened to be charismatic but otherwise normal?

What value is there in reading closely (something you've asked me to do) the far from inerrant tales told by people as they reacted inaccurately/wrongly/incompently to your god?

How do you know he wants to be worshipped? The only source for that claim is written by humans. How do you  know he wants our love and adoration? The only source for that claim is from humans. How do you know he really sent his kid to save us if the only source for that story is from humans?

Of course, you used the word "many", which means that you get to leaf through the pages of the bible and say "yep, nope, nope, yep, nope, yep" to the various passages, because your electrons orbits touched by god just a little bit better than anyone else's. He loves us all, but you a bit better, apparently. Because you've got it right. You know. Insight is your middle name.

Your time might be better served by going to christian sites and straightening them out first. Then, once you've consolidated all religious thought into one coherent mass (which should be easy, given the power of your insights, etc.), you could come back here and tell us what you've done to change religion to make is both workable and believable, and hell, I'm pretty sure you'd be much more effective, because you'd have impressive bona fides and everything.

Or you can stay here and continue the biblical tradition of misinterpreting everything, the tradition of assuming that you, and only you, know the truth, the tradition of picking the stuff you like on a whim, and hope that somehow you can somehow manage to change people who think into people who don't.

Not much of a goal, but hey, have at it.

P.S. Notice how nice I was not asking you to clarify what you meant by "(cloud)" in your electron comment. So that's one less thing you'll have to make up today. Thank me later.

Election "Cloud" is the common terminology because it's location is not observed until one chooses to look. 
The observer changes reality.

The rest of the stories are intended to be understood as real events.
Jesus turned water to wine and there is no human scientific process known to explain how it happened.
Same with the rest.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6627
  • Darwins +796/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #186 on: June 18, 2013, 06:18:05 PM »
Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

No, not all known laws of science dictate that. The Second Law of Thermodynamics mentions it, but the Theory of Gravity doesn't, the Theory of Plate Techtonics doesn't. You're trying to grandstand here.

Secondly, you don't understand the theory behind energy dissipating anyway, so you're agog that anything exists because we're all supposed to be gone now. You don't seem to understand that the time frame for large amounts of energy dissipating away is measured in billions of years, not your lifetime. Nor are you taking into consideration that energy can get turned into mass (most of the mass of any given tree or other plant came from the conversion of sunlight into matter), or that mass and energy trade places all the time. One of the reasons we cannot create a perfect vacuum is because inside the space we are trying to vacate energy passing through the vessel is turning into matter all the time. There is no such thing as empty space. Once there is a difference in potential between any two points, energy exists. And where there is energy, there is soon matter as well.

The earth does indeed have energy dissipating, but we also have a nearby star that floods our planet with energy every single day. One single square mile of land gets hit with 12 trillion watt hours of energy every year. And our sweet little planet has lots of square miles of land. And square miles of water, which get hit the same way. So the earth gets a net gain off energy and will for as long as life can exist on it. Granted, at some point the sun is going to get ugly on us and all these nice things will go away, but in the meantime, those of us who have not yet had the pleasure of drowning will get a constant supply with which to maintain our energy levels, natural and otherwise.

Science is indeed incredible. But it's not your job to read one fact and extrapolate it to mean everything else is impossible without a god.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #187 on: June 18, 2013, 06:52:09 PM »
Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

No, not all known laws of science dictate that. The Second Law of Thermodynamics mentions it, but the Theory of Gravity doesn't, the Theory of Plate Techtonics doesn't. You're trying to grandstand here.

Secondly, you don't understand the theory behind energy dissipating anyway, so you're agog that anything exists because we're all supposed to be gone now. You don't seem to understand that the time frame for large amounts of energy dissipating away is measured in billions of years, not your lifetime. Nor are you taking into consideration that energy can get turned into mass (most of the mass of any given tree or other plant came from the conversion of sunlight into matter), or that mass and energy trade places all the time. One of the reasons we cannot create a perfect vacuum is because inside the space we are trying to vacate energy passing through the vessel is turning into matter all the time. There is no such thing as empty space. Once there is a difference in potential between any two points, energy exists. And where there is energy, there is soon matter as well.

The earth does indeed have energy dissipating, but we also have a nearby star that floods our planet with energy every single day. One single square mile of land gets hit with 12 trillion watt hours of energy every year. And our sweet little planet has lots of square miles of land. And square miles of water, which get hit the same way. So the earth gets a net gain off energy and will for as long as life can exist on it. Granted, at some point the sun is going to get ugly on us and all these nice things will go away, but in the meantime, those of us who have not yet had the pleasure of drowning will get a constant supply with which to maintain our energy levels, natural and otherwise.

Science is indeed incredible. But it's not your job to read one fact and extrapolate it to mean everything else is impossible without a god.

I did mean "Laws" of science.  Theories are not considered laws.
Gravity is a mystery as to what it even is.
And yes, the continental drift uses up available energy.
Energy dissipates and all mater is headed toward dust, then nothing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6627
  • Darwins +796/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #188 on: June 18, 2013, 07:17:46 PM »
I did mean "Laws" of science.  Theories are not considered laws.
Gravity is a mystery as to what it even is.
And yes, the continental drift uses up available energy.
Energy dissipates and all mater is headed toward dust, then nothing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe

Yep, there is a big difference between a theory and a law:

Law: A theoretical principle deduced from particular facts, applicable to a defined group or class of phenomena, and expressible by a statement that a particular phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions be present (Oxford English Dictionary as quoted in Futuyma, 1979)

My bold.

Yep, gravity is a mystery, plate techtonics does indeed demonstrate, among other things, the dissipation of energy, but it isn't mentioned in the theory. Doesn't have to be. It has one of its own.

But you successfully avoided a direct and useful response the body of my post. I told you it would take time, and you woefully said that we are all going to turn to dust then disappear. Next week, sometime, if your guess is right.

In human terms, the ultimate fate of the universe if totally irrelevant. We won't live that long. Seems like we have a bunch of science-hating fundy's who think JC is coming back (probably like, you know, Monday, if the universe is only going to last until Wednesday or Thursday). And none of those people want a thing to do with science. So they won't be contributing to efforts to discover ways to leave our planet before it gets toasted. With fewer people looking for answers, we might not find any.

Of course, the sun will actually fry the planet in about 4 billion years when it becomes a red giant. But it will give off more energy in around 600,000 years and ruin our atmosphere and make it impossible for things to survive much longer and though I'm sure christians will still be waiting patiently for the promised return, the rest of us will just roll over and die because we won't have a choice.

But guess what. It doesn't affect you or me right now. It will never affect either of us. Never ever ever. So stop worrying about it.

Edit: a few spelling errors. My keyboard seems to be turning to dust and is slightly dysfunctional.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2013, 07:19:59 PM by ParkingPlaces »
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3049
  • Darwins +271/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #189 on: June 18, 2013, 09:01:53 PM »
Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

That's actually a very interesting question, and although I knew what an atomic explosion was I didn't know how it did it.    There's a Wikipedia article on it here.

Short answer:  The strong nuclear force that holds an atom together is substantially more powerful (especially at very short distances) than most other forces that would be in its environment.  This is why an atom doesn't usually break apart apart at random times. (Radioactivity, with loose neutrons darting about, is a notable exception.)

Normally a neutron doesn't have sufficient energy to do much of anything, and just gets absorbed by the nucleus. If, however, you ram the nucleus of an atom with a higher-energy neutron (e.g. by using a conventional explosive to force wedges of fissionable material together at high velocity[1]), you can disrupt the nucleus such that it deforms.  As it stretches out of shape, apparently this changes the distance relationship among the subatomic particles such that the strong nuclear force can no longer hold the atom together.  At that point the electrical force dominates over the strong nuclear force, and because the protons are of the same positive charge and like charges repel, this drives them apart even further.

This releases a lot of energy, along with more high-energy particles which in turn hit other nuclei, resulting in the proverbial chain reaction.  An atomic explosion is essentially a very fast and energetic breakdown of a highly fissionable material such as Uranium235.  (A hydrogen bomb, on the other hand, is based on fusion rather than fission and requires even more energy to get it started... Hence the use of small atomic devices as triggers to generate energy sufficient to smash two nuclei together.)
 1. Thank you, Time-Life Science Encyclopedia! I have very fond childhood memories of those books.
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #190 on: June 18, 2013, 10:56:33 PM »

It is guided theory.

More of just making shit up as you go along I see. "Guided theory"? Where do you get this fiction?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2013, 11:07:12 PM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #191 on: June 18, 2013, 11:30:09 PM »

Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

This is actually a great question! Now instead of assuming your claimed holy book in advance, why not actually go out and, ya know, study? Do some research? Talk to some scientists? Take some courses at a community college? You know, actually do some work for knowledge - instead of taking the all too common and intellectually lazy road of assuming, "It's just impossible any other way!"

The Argument from Incredulity fallacy is never a sufficient answer.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #192 on: June 18, 2013, 11:44:28 PM »
SPAG

My spell check says I should have separated heath and care.
Grammar check turns up nothing.
Perhaps you didn't like the content.
From that response, it is quite clear that you do not know what the term SPAG means.  There is no harm or shame in that; it is not an acronym that appears often so it is very understandable why someone would be unaware of what it means.

This would have been a perfect opportunity for you to ask median for clarification (something like asking 'What does SPAG mean?').  Instead you opted to assume that you know the correct definition and just roll with it.  Or perhaps you 'just had faith' that you knew what it meant.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline junebug72

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2221
  • Darwins +73/-90
  • Gender: Female
  • "Question Everything"
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #193 on: June 19, 2013, 07:29:50 AM »
Quote
Junebug-Would you still believe in God if there was no bible?

Are you contemplating the answer to this question?

I work 12 hour days and am a full time student.   So I answer in my free time.
You may tumble your mind imagining my motives all day.  If that's what you want to do with your day. 
The most important part of conversation is learning that you have full control of your half.
I don't recall either of those questions.   Likely because I'm busy with another train of thought.
Humans cannot multitask. 

Excuses, excuses.  Dropping out of a debate is the same thing as saying, I"m wrong.  You are encouraging the non belief when you do this.




God is interested in all humans being with Him.  Keeping all humans alive
for eternity on earth is the priority of healthcare workers alone.  God does not keep the same priorities.

First sentence I can relate to.  The rest is really                                                                                                                        out there.




Children are much more adaptable to new environments than cranky old people so if God takes children
out of this world, it's better for them than us adults.


What in the world does this respond to?  You should really,really, really be a lot more careful about what you say about God.



Yes, God loves his children no matter what they do.  God forgives every sin except for rejection of the Holy Spirit.
Those who reject the Holy Spirit end up without.   Being without God on earth is one thing.  Being without God
AND not having "the world" is Hell.   How would God provide a good situation for non-believers?


Not according to the bible.  Drowning the world, Sodom and Gomorrah, animal sacrifice, etc.
It's not rejection of the Holy Spirit it is blaspheme of the Holy Spirit.  There's a big difference.  Mark 3:29




Should God visit with those who reject him?   How would that benefit them?  They would hate it.
For God to bring those who reject Him into heaven.....well.....would that be like Hell ...or worse?

 
God visits the non believer through us and so far you have not shown anybody here God.  They would not hate it but appreciate it. 

 :o Really?  It would be like heaven.  Heaven can not be hell.



Worse than Hell......Is that what you want for those who reject God?  Isn't Hell lonely enough without
a deity you don't trust hanging around?

What I want for non believers is for people like you to quit telling them they're going to hell.  The way I see it they haven't rejected God.  They reject your religion.  They reject the old testament bible and so do I. 

Luke 11:11-13
11.If a son ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? 
Or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?

12.Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13.If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children,
how much shall your heavenly father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?


If you wouldn't do it to your child God will not, being better than you, do it to the human race.

I couldn't even punish Hitler like that for an eternity.  If I wouldn't, God wouldn't.  I wouldn't drown the world.  I am not better than God, God is better than me.  I most certainly would not populate the world through incest, as the genesis story suggests.  I would not create several races and declare 1 my favorite.  I would love them all the same.  Oh yea, genesis doesn't address different races.  I would not give a commandment; thou shalt not kill, then turn around and say go kill people for sinning, contradicting myself. 

If Christians would stick to being like the person Jesus taught perhaps their religion wouldn't be under constant scrutiny and they certainly would not be disgracing God.

When I think of Love I think of the first time I held my baby boy in my arms and I swore I would never let any body hurt him.  Love pulsed through my veins, my nervous system, my soul.  God's Love is greater than this, IMO.
Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man.
Thomas Paine

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_paine.html#XXwlhVIMq06zWg2d.99

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #194 on: June 19, 2013, 08:25:52 AM »
Quote
Junebug-Would you still believe in God if there was no bible?

Are you contemplating the answer to this question?

I work 12 hour days and am a full time student.   So I answer in my free time.
You may tumble your mind imagining my motives all day.  If that's what you want to do with your day. 
The most important part of conversation is learning that you have full control of your half.
I don't recall either of those questions.   Likely because I'm busy with another train of thought.
Humans cannot multitask. 

Excuses, excuses.  Dropping out of a debate is the same thing as saying, I"m wrong. 

There was another poster very active in debate.  I choose not to dominate
that thread and to allow the other poster conversation and focus on other
threads that had many questions for me.

What you make of my decisions process, is none of my concern.


Quote
You are encouraging the non belief when you do this.

What you make of my decisions process, is none of my concern.




God is interested in all humans being with Him.  Keeping all humans alive
for eternity on earth is the priority of healthcare workers alone.  God does not keep the same priorities.

Quote
First sentence I can relate to.  The rest is really                                                                                                                        out there.

Super.




]You should really,really, really be a lot more careful about what you say about God.

He's very forgiving. 



Yes, God loves his children no matter what they do.  God forgives every sin except for rejection of the Holy Spirit.
Those who reject the Holy Spirit end up without.   Being without God on earth is one thing.  Being without God
AND not having "the world" is Hell.   How would God provide a good situation for non-believers?


Quote
Not according to the bible.  Drowning the world, Sodom and Gomorrah, animal sacrifice, etc.
It's not rejection of the Holy Spirit it is blaspheme of the Holy Spirit.  There's a big difference.  Mark 3:29

No difference.

Should God visit with those who reject him?   How would that benefit them?  They would hate it.
For God to bring those who reject Him into heaven.....well.....would that be like Hell ...or worse?

 
Quote
God visits the non believer through us and so far you have not shown anybody here God.  They would not hate it but appreciate it. 

That's the Fathers job, not mine.   I am opposed to evangelism.




Worse than Hell......Is that what you want for those who reject God?  Isn't Hell lonely enough without
a deity you don't trust hanging around?

Quote
What I want for non believers is for people like you to quit telling them they're going to hell.  The way I see it they haven't rejected God.  They reject your religion.  They reject the old testament bible and so do I.


We are already in Hell.  Heaven is an option to choose to get out of our current state. 

Quote
Luke 11:11-13
11.If a son ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? 
Or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent?

12.Or if he shall ask an egg, will he offer him a scorpion?
13.If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children,
how much shall your heavenly father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him?

If you wouldn't do it to your child God will not, being better than you, do it to the human race.

They have to ask God.  That would be different than cursing God.
Do you know what happens when my adult son curses me?
I give him the gift of freedom from my tyranny.  As does God.



Quote
I couldn't even punish Hitler like that for an eternity.

There is no need.  Those who reject God experience internal TORMENT.  Thirst, flames, all that.
Have you ever been "tormented"?   It is a self inflicted condition.  Not to be confused with torture.


Quote
I would not create several races and declare 1 my favorite.

He did have a chosen people.   They produced His son and they carried out the task of conveying the message
of salvation.  Open the book and read it again.  The jews did not get fluffy pillows to sit on and eat figs back then, and they don't now either.

Quote
I would love them all the same.  Oh yea, genesis doesn't address different races.  I would not give a commandment; thou shalt not kill, then turn around and say go kill people for sinning, contradicting myself.


It's "do not murder".   I've had neighbors who were killed and eaten.  Some people who commit lethal crimes just need to be put to death.  It's not revenge.  We just can't live with such people alive in our midst.

Quote
If Christians would stick to being like the person Jesus taught perhaps their religion wouldn't be under constant scrutiny and they certainly would not be disgracing God.

All are sinners. God is not harmed at any time.

Quote
When I think of Love I think of the first time I held my baby boy in my arms and I swore I would never let any body hurt him.  Love pulsed through my veins, my nervous system, my soul.  God's Love is greater than this, IMO.

You would show this same love if your boyfriend murdered your baby?
http://badbreeders.net/2013/05/14/bad-boyfriend-sodomizes-and-strangles-baby/

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #195 on: June 19, 2013, 08:32:13 AM »
SPAG

My spell check says I should have separated heath and care.
Grammar check turns up nothing.
Perhaps you didn't like the content.
From that response, it is quite clear that you do not know what the term SPAG means.  There is no harm or shame in that; it is not an acronym that appears often so it is very understandable why someone would be unaware of what it means.

This would have been a perfect opportunity for you to ask median for clarification (something like asking 'What does SPAG mean?').  Instead you opted to assume that you know the correct definition and just roll with it.  Or perhaps you 'just had faith' that you knew what it meant.

Or I looked it up in 2 or 3 places.   What's your point again?

http://www.internetslang.com/SPAG-meaning-definition.asp
http://www.acronymfinder.com/SPAG.html
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spag

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #196 on: June 19, 2013, 08:37:59 AM »

Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

This is actually a great question! Now instead of assuming your claimed holy book in advance, why not actually go out and, ya know, study? Do some research? Talk to some scientists? Take some courses at a community college? You know, actually do some work for knowledge - instead of taking the all too common and intellectually lazy road of assuming, "It's just impossible any other way!" The Argument from Incredulity fallacy is never a sufficient answer.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

So you have no idea, and attacking conversations going on in your mind helps to avoid the reality.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #197 on: June 19, 2013, 08:41:20 AM »
Given that all known laws of science dictate that energy dissipates, and my dinner confirms it, how does an atomic explosion get bottled into a few grass of mass in the first place?

That's actually a very interesting question, and although I knew what an atomic explosion was I didn't know how it did it.    There's a Wikipedia article on it here.

Short answer:  The strong nuclear force that holds an atom together is substantially more powerful (especially at very short distances) than most other forces that would be in its environment.  This is why an atom doesn't usually break apart apart at random times. (Radioactivity, with loose neutrons darting about, is a notable exception.)

Normally a neutron doesn't have sufficient energy to do much of anything, and just gets absorbed by the nucleus. If, however, you ram the nucleus of an atom with a higher-energy neutron (e.g. by using a conventional explosive to force wedges of fissionable material together at high velocity[1]), you can disrupt the nucleus such that it deforms.  As it stretches out of shape, apparently this changes the distance relationship among the subatomic particles such that the strong nuclear force can no longer hold the atom together.  At that point the electrical force dominates over the strong nuclear force, and because the protons are of the same positive charge and like charges repel, this drives them apart even further.

This releases a lot of energy, along with more high-energy particles which in turn hit other nuclei, resulting in the proverbial chain reaction.  An atomic explosion is essentially a very fast and energetic breakdown of a highly fissionable material such as Uranium235.  (A hydrogen bomb, on the other hand, is based on fusion rather than fission and requires even more energy to get it started... Hence the use of small atomic devices as triggers to generate energy sufficient to smash two nuclei together.)
 1. Thank you, Time-Life Science Encyclopedia! I have very fond childhood memories of those books.

We do know a little about how it all comes apart.  How it got there in the first place is the problem.
Especially given that Dark energy is pushing everything apart at increasing speeds.

Offline SkyWriting

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
  • Darwins +9/-75
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #198 on: June 19, 2013, 08:44:40 AM »
I did mean "Laws" of science.  Theories are not considered laws.
Gravity is a mystery as to what it even is.
And yes, the continental drift uses up available energy.
Energy dissipates and all mater is headed toward dust, then nothing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe

Yep, there is a big difference between a theory and a law:

Law: A theoretical principle deduced from particular facts, applicable to a defined group or class of phenomena, and expressible by a statement that a particular phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions be present (Oxford English Dictionary as quoted in Futuyma, 1979)

My bold.

Yep, gravity is a mystery, plate techtonics does indeed demonstrate, among other things, the dissipation of energy, but it isn't mentioned in the theory. Doesn't have to be. It has one of its own.

But you successfully avoided a direct and useful response the body of my post. I told you it would take time, and you woefully said that we are all going to turn to dust then disappear. Next week, sometime, if your guess is right.

In human terms, the ultimate fate of the universe if totally irrelevant. We won't live that long. Seems like we have a bunch of science-hating fundy's who think JC is coming back (probably like, you know, Monday, if the universe is only going to last until Wednesday or Thursday). And none of those people want a thing to do with science. So they won't be contributing to efforts to discover ways to leave our planet before it gets toasted. With fewer people looking for answers, we might not find any.

Of course, the sun will actually fry the planet in about 4 billion years when it becomes a red giant. But it will give off more energy in around 600,000 years and ruin our atmosphere and make it impossible for things to survive much longer and though I'm sure christians will still be waiting patiently for the promised return, the rest of us will just roll over and die because we won't have a choice.

But guess what. It doesn't affect you or me right now. It will never affect either of us. Never ever ever. So stop worrying about it.

Edit: a few spelling errors. My keyboard seems to be turning to dust and is slightly dysfunctional.

The you can agree with me that looking for life is futile, because finding another planet with life on it....well, the human race just doesn't have the time to go looking for slime molds in space.

Offline Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1349
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #199 on: June 19, 2013, 10:06:17 AM »
The you can agree with me that looking for life is futile, because finding another planet with life on it....well, the human race just doesn't have the time to go looking for slime molds in space.
What should we be doing instead? Looking for something that, in all probability, isn't real?

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #200 on: June 19, 2013, 10:13:07 AM »
From that response, it is quite clear that you do not know what the term SPAG means.  There is no harm or shame in that; it is not an acronym that appears often so it is very understandable why someone would be unaware of what it means.

This would have been a perfect opportunity for you to ask median for clarification (something like asking 'What does SPAG mean?').  Instead you opted to assume that you know the correct definition and just roll with it.  Or perhaps you 'just had faith' that you knew what it meant.

Or I looked it up in 2 or 3 places.   What's your point again?

http://www.internetslang.com/SPAG-meaning-definition.asp
http://www.acronymfinder.com/SPAG.html
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spag
Based on all of the responses and questions you've received from median, you're telling me you honestly assumed he was slamming your grammar?

The point is just because you think you know something doesn't mean you actually do.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +415/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #201 on: June 19, 2013, 10:37:15 AM »
The you can agree with me that looking for life is futile, because finding another planet with life on it....well, the human race just doesn't have the time to go looking for slime molds in space.
I'm quite certain that, according to your criteria, the human race didn't really have time to explore and understand the wave-particle nature of light.  And if the human race dedicated all of its efforts towards that goal, I'd be inclined to agree with you.  But the general principle of trying to understand our reality in hopes of making better decisions when faced with reality seems like a good use of time.  No, certainly not all of it, but some.

When looking to solve the problems here and now, one needs to look in their toolbox to see what can be brought to bear in solving that problem.  Part of that toolbox is our knowledge base - and, frankly, the more s**t we know, the more potential solutions we can bring to the table to solve problems.  I would hate to wait until a problem slaps us in the face before we try to tackle it.  Who knows?  Maybe someone 200 years ago could have been curious about the ramifications of carbon and methane in the atmosphere.  If people had been curious about that 200 years ago, maybe we would have had that knowledge in our toolbox before we had the industrial revolution and we could have at least minimized our negative impact on the environment.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: 1 + 1 + 1 = 1
« Reply #202 on: June 19, 2013, 11:01:02 AM »

So you have no idea, and attacking conversations going on in your mind helps to avoid the reality.

Having "an idea" is exactly your problem, you are desperate. You feel that you MUST have the answer right now otherwise you're uncomfortable. So you take your first "idea" (religious assumption) and just go with it. Congratulations! Welcome to every religion on the planet. But that is the opposite of science and honest investigation.

Yes, I have an "an idea" regarding the origins of the beginning of the universe (that given the 1st Law, energy has always been in one form or another) . But it isn't dogmatic and can easily change with the evidence. I no longer allow a fear of death, fear of the unknown, or fear of loneliness to push me toward gullibility, credulity, or the acceptance of irrational argument "on faith" (b/c faith is not a pathway to truth. It is just gullibility dressed up).

Contrary to your claim, I'm not avoiding reality. I'm glad to admit when I don't know something, are you?


Here's a real scientist talking on the subject:

« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 11:03:56 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan