Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
Science / Re: On the Moon Landing
« Last post by jaimehlers on Today at 05:08:27 PM »

Conspiracy theories are the modern-day equivalent of witch trials.  No matter what evidence is produced, proponents of the conspiracy can come up with some reason why it shows the conspiracy to be real (for example, a woman who lived an evil/improper life was clearly a witch, but a woman who lived a good/proper life was also clearly a witch, because witches dissemble to try to hide their true nature).  The problem is, this violates probability theory; the expectation of the posterior probability, after viewing the evidence, must equal the prior probability.  If you have an expectation of seeing evidence, then you also need to have an equal and opposite expectation of seeing counter-evidence.

If not seeing evidence of the conspiracy strengthens the likelihood that the conspiracy exists, then it follows that seeing evidence of the conspiracy weakens that likelihood to an equal but opposite degree.  By the same token, if living a good and proper life makes it more likely that a woman is a witch, then living an evil and improper life necessarily makes it equally less likely that she is a witch.

That's the real reason conspiracy theories end up being so ridiculous, they try to argue that both the evidence for and evidence against supports the conspiracy they try to believe in, not recognizing that you can't have it both ways - you can't argue that both evidence of the conspiracy and evidence against the conspiracy increases the likelihood that the conspiracy exists.  If evidence for increases that likelihood, evidence against decreases it, and vice versa.

Okay, turning water into wine may have been a sort of magic trick, as that seems like something that could be easy to replicate (if I recall correctly even the Pharaoh's magicians did it in Exodus.  The multiplying food I'm not sure, though I do think that Jesus healed the blind, was crucified, and then was resurrected (though I freely admit i can't 100% confirm that definitely). As for the multitude of dead prophets coming back to life as their tombs opened, I don't think any of that happened—if a whole bunch of prophets had risen from their graves at once, even at the time word would have likely gotten out fast.  Also of note is that, if I recall correctly from what I remember, that was only in one Gospel anyway, with the others not bringing up an event that definitely would have been noticed by everyone.

so you've made up your own religion, just like every other Christian.   Each time something seems ridiculous, some Christian run away from it, and claim it wasn't really mean by their god.   You claim that parts of the bible are true and parts are false, and have *nothing* to separate them except your desire to not seem silly when a non-Christian shows that your claims are ridiculous. 

Again, CD have you even tried to keep reading the bible? 

as opposed to some of the folks on the forum, I am looking to show you that your claims are wrong.  I find such willful ignorance to be hypocritical and harmful since your desire to cling to your baseless claims is no better than any other theist, no matter how liberal, conservative or murderous.   
You're right. I should have smited your new post with all the anti-homosexual links, including the fake website.

My bad.
No, that is not what you should have done. Neither should you be using smites in this way.

I will continue to smite your ignorance.
No, you will not.

You are unreasonably expecting everyone to be as savvy as you think that you are.

This is simple arrogance.

GB Mod

I am curious now.  is there a rule on what one can be smited/applauded for?   
Science / Re: On the Moon Landing
« Last post by velkyn on Today at 04:53:36 PM »
It just sounds fishy to me. Terrorists with box cutters were able to penetrate the best air defense in the world? And fly planes perfectly? You can even see a missile fly out from under the plane in one of the videos. Those were not commercial planes. They were military. You can clearly see it in the video.

1:34 - 2:10

Skep's idiotic videos are quite like the nonsense about "backmasking" the Christian claim that rock music has messages from Satan recorded backward on it.   The false claims made require the audience to be told what they are seeing or hearing, because no one would come to that conclusion themselves.  It takes intentional attempts to spread false information and the ignorance of the audience for the claims of Christians and conspiracy theorists to be spread. 

Of course skep doesn't address any points put to him.   He just runs to the next false claims, hoping that it succeeds. 
Science / Re: On the Moon Landing
« Last post by eh! on Today at 04:34:47 PM »
Clearly the gov makes the conspiracy videos as part of an even bigger conspiracy. Only professionals could make those videos look so amateurish.

Join the dots people.
Sexuality, Reproduction, & Abortion / Re: Orlando Shooting
« Last post by jaimehlers on Today at 04:31:44 PM »
I have evidence, decades of it, you have nothing.
So if you have evidence spanning decades, where is it?  I mean, you should be able to bury me with these decades of recorded data which track both the hits and the misses and which show beyond reasonable doubt that you are correct, assuming that you actually have them, that is.  I think it's more likely that you've got decades of memories, which is all well and good...unless you know, as I do, that human memory is far from reliable enough for this sort of thing, and it gets worse the further back you go.  People start getting details wrong within hours of something happening.

Personally, I think you should quit before you let your attitude dig you even deeper.  You see, I didn't say that the empirical models that people use are worthless - just that they aren't very good.  That same process of empirical modeling led people to seriously believe in things like nature spirits, rain dances, magic spells, curses, and deities, because most people only count the hits while ignoring or forgetting the misses.

Let's take your examples of kangaroos and dingos reproducing less before a drought.  Where's the records showing that kangaroos and dingos have statistically less births before a drought?  You didn't provide any.  You just dropped the assertion out there and expected other people to take your word for it, basing it on experience, meaning authority.  What you forgot is that actual authorities still have to back up assertions they make, instead of just requiring people to take their word for it.
Science / Re: On the Moon Landing
« Last post by nogodsforme on Today at 04:30:20 PM »
It's like the conspiracy to cover up aliens, the existence of god, who really killed Kennedy, Bigfoot, that Elvis is really alive, and Hitler escaped to South America. No evidence for any of them, and lots of evidence to the contrary, but that only shows how good the conspiracy is. "They" are so good they are even able to manufacture convincing contrary evidence!

But. Why?


Can someone please tell me why all the lying and faked videos and covering up and killing people to hide the secret (the secret that is so secret, that the government allows people to make youtube videos about it) and so on is being done to disguise the "fact" that we never landed people on the moon?

And why every single president, including repubs like Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2, plus all of their staffs and security people also went along with the coverups?

Not to mention the thousands of international scientists and academics and science reporters and military people affiliated with the space program over the decades-- and their friends and families-- were all paid off or threatened and never talked, not even on their deathbeds? Other scandals have leaks, but not this one, with all the youtube videos....

Please explain why. What would be the point?
Getting back to the stuff about trans people and kids-- I don't think it is possible in the US for a parent to request that a small child be given a sex change operation based on the child saying they want to be the opposite gender. My understanding, based on social work experience, is that the person needs to be an adult, and has to go to therapy, get hormone treatments and live as the opposite gender for a time. Then they can have the surgery.

It is not supposed to be done overnight, on a whim, to get attention, to shock parents, to please parents or whatever. If someone tried to get sex change surgery to shock their parents, that would be a very mentally unstable person whose gender identity was the least of the problem.

I do know of cultures (Pacific Islander, specifically) where the family decides that they want a girl (who will do domestic chores, care for elderly parents, etc) when they have a boy, and treat one of the boys as a girl. The person may get the surgery eventually as an adult, because they have come to think of themselves as a female. Family pressure to conform to being what the family needed.

That, to me, would be similar to a black person getting their skin lightened, wearing blue contact lenses, straightening their hair and getting nose surgery to look more white because their family wanted a white child.  :(
Chatter / Re: Gun Fails
« Last post by Nick on Today at 04:05:11 PM »
A customer upset with his order at a Taco Bell shot into the restaurant's drive-thru window, police said.
So, "Run for the border?"
Reviews / Re: Rate the Last Film You Saw
« Last post by Emma286 on Today at 04:01:54 PM »
I loved watching that actor in The Secret Life of Walter Mitty and Wonder Man when I was a kid!  :) Must dig those out and watch them again. Also mean to check out White Christmas when I next can!
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10