Philosophies/Spirituality

Reality Vs. Perception - Hanged Man Project

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

Any study that is based on the past is pointless then? No one was alive during the Cretaceous and yet we can infer from the evidence left many things about the t-rex. It works the same with evolution and abiogenesis. They can be studied and theorized in much the same ways. Look at what we have today, look at the evidence of how things were "back then" and base conclusions on these FACTS.

Dec 23 2010 10:47PM

0 0

BLKOUT

Posts: 1287 - Karma: 20

Karma: 20

Posts: 1287

Insane

fail, I mean this?

Dec 23 2010 10:48PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

If this is your source your a fucking retard.

Dec 23 2010 10:49PM

0 0

blindside

Posts: 5619 - Karma: 1,199

Karma: 1,199

Posts: 5619

No Life

lolololololol

Dec 23 2010 10:49PM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

Furthermore, this is completely untrue. Abiogenesis has been replicated in labs No faith there. Just cold hard facts.

Dec 23 2010 10:50PM

0 0

kardaddy

Posts: 435 - Karma: 10

Karma: 10

Posts: 435

Ridiculous

University of Berkley is a bad source? Am i missing something?

Dec 23 2010 10:59PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

No what I mean is that it's not proof of evolution it is just an overview of the current theory

Dec 23 2010 11:06PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

You sir,

Are correct
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/ribonucleotides/

Dec 23 2010 11:07PM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

Ah. The point was that the theories aren't based in faith. It's known exactly how it worked/ could have worked.

Dec 23 2010 11:09PM

0 0

YourBoyBlue

Posts: 213 - Karma: 10

Karma: 10

Posts: 213

Loner

It hasn't been replicated to the extent of the model. The *THEORY* of evolution is based on billions of random circumstances and combinations; you can't replicate that in a lab.

I'm not saying it isn't true, I was correcting someone's 'fact'. But as I said, it doesn't matter and it doesn't bother me if you have faith in evolution

Dec 23 2010 11:11PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

I see what you mean, and yeah that dude that said it was based on faith is the fucking retard haha.

please excuse me for my mistake :)

Dec 23 2010 11:13PM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

haha it's cool Goku

Dec 23 2010 11:14PM

0 0

bistroburrito

Posts: 417 - Karma: 11

Karma: 11

Posts: 417

Ridiculous

raised catholic, currently questioning organized religions in general...I have some interests in Buddhism however...mainly I believe there is some "greater power" and I hope there is an afterlife/reincarnation but I lead a good life not for that, but really just so I'm not a dick

Dec 23 2010 11:15PM

0 0

epoxiedtip

Posts: 535 - Karma: 56

Karma: 56

Posts: 535

Ridiculous

i believe in newschoolers

Dec 23 2010 11:29PM

0 0

Dr.Professor

Posts: 143 - Karma: 10

Karma: 10

Posts: 143

Pro

Catholic

Dec 23 2010 11:44PM

0 0

Steezy.Taught.Me

Posts: 104 - Karma: 5

Karma: 5

Posts: 104

Pro

yesssss haha

Dec 24 2010 1:14AM

0 0

Kajex

Posts: 1069 - Karma: 178

Karma: 178

Posts: 1069

Insane

Now while I agree that this is the attitude the entire world should revolve around, what if the only way to protect one's self and livelihood is to cause harm to another human being ?? I'm not asking this to start an argument, I'm merely curious as to what a person with such beliefs thinks.

Dec 24 2010 2:12AM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

If you are going to worship the dark lord you should at least spell his name right, or forever be sentenced to a dark oblivion.

Dec 24 2010 3:02AM

0 0

95959

Posts: 2765 - Karma: 377

Karma: 377

Posts: 2765

Addict

I think we need an NSG sticky on this. Theory=proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the vast majority of reputable scientists. Hypothesis= an educated guess(aka what most of you think a "theory" is). Seriously I'm sick and god damned tired of correcting people in every religious shitstorm thread.

Dec 24 2010 3:18AM

0 0

TheReverend

Posts: 364 - Karma: 31

Karma: 31

Posts: 364

Loner

Nothing is right, because everything is right

WOAH you may be thinking, that was deep.

Christians have the right idea, Be nice to people, learn to forgive yada yada all that crap (although most that call themself christian do none of the above lololol)

But one problem is they deny self-reliance. (omg EMERSON) What is the point of devoting your life to pleasing a God/gods if you aren't satisfied as a whole? You must help yourself before you can help others (omg THOREAU). But you also can't deny Science. There are some things proven by science that even if it is against, say, a book written 2500 years ago by disciples who know nothing of what will come to be in the future, is undeniably the truth. Sometimes, last time I checked, some things written in the past are inaccurate. But those are just books, just like the BIble. ITS JUST A BOOK. but not talking crap against the bible, cause it's a fucking GENIUS collection. Whether God is real or not, I believe Jesus was real. Was he the son of God? maybe not. Maybe he was just a really good guy.

[I'd say a hefty majority of "atheists" haven't even read the bible lololol]

Religions are like puzzle pieces that have been distributed to different groups of people that are too scared to work together to complete the puzzle because they want to believe that their piece is the only right piece. Ignoring other views is the most ignorant thing anyone could do in life.

So remember this kids. Stay in school, and don't do drugs. (or do, I don't give a shit.)

Dec 24 2010 3:29AM

0 0

ride-rider

Posts: 1761 - Karma: 20

Karma: 20

Posts: 1761

Insane

Not supposed to be a religious shitstorm thread. I guess everyone just can't seem to keep there opinions to them selves. All this was supposed to be was a what do you think. Not a why yours is wrong and mine is better. It wasn't even supposed to be focused on religion. It was clearly stated that this is more geared toward philosophies and spirituality, with a side order of religion if need be.

Dec 24 2010 1:16PM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

But that hippie stuff is boring :p

Dec 24 2010 1:38PM

0 0

CAPSLOCK*

Posts: 345 - Karma: 19

Karma: 19

Posts: 345

Loner

I'm an agnostic. Even if evidence tends to suggest the non-existence of god, science has not proved it for a fact. Therefore the true scientific mind will take the agnostic position, for now. There's nothing shameful in saying we're not sure if we keep looking for the answer.

Dec 24 2010 1:55PM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

The atheistic view is not that evidence supports the lack of a god. It's that there is no evidence supporting there being a god. Atheism is simply a lack of belief. No smart atheist would ever say there is absolutely no possibility of a god. The agnosticism you're promoting is much the same as the point of view most atheists have.

Dec 24 2010 2:11PM

0 0

AssMunch

Posts: 358 - Karma: 78

Karma: 78

Posts: 358

Loner

I believe in experince.

Dec 24 2010 2:16PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

Dude science is definitely not a religion ya goomba.

Dec 24 2010 9:01PM

0 0

SCOO-WOOP

Posts: 1264 - Karma: 244

Karma: 244

Posts: 1264

Insane

I agree with this statement.

Dec 24 2010 9:04PM

0 0

es94

Posts: 291 - Karma: 67

Karma: 67

Posts: 291

Loner

i see no proof. however im not going to get in anyones face and tell them definitively there is no god. believe what you want.
that being said, i believe in most of the principles of christianity...turning the other cheek, loving your neighbor etc...the way i see it, i can believe in the positive ideals of christianity without believing in god.

Dec 24 2010 9:12PM

0 0

Smuffy

Posts: 4686 - Karma: 3,408

Karma: 3,408

Posts: 4686

No Life

Finally someone who knows what theyre talking about. For example, evolution is only a theory, just like germs are only a theory. We accept them because there is enough evidence for it to be legitimate.

Dec 24 2010 9:34PM

0 0

shocker611

Posts: 2599 - Karma: 423

Karma: 423

Posts: 2599

Addict

im christian.. dont understand all the hate between different religions/lack of religion.. bottom line is the main difference is your opinion on one person in history and a different view on how everything got here.. i have zero hate for any atheist, hell it makes since, and i would expect to get the same respect back

Dec 24 2010 10:01PM

0 0

Posts: 5136 - Karma: -1,030

Karma: -1,030

Posts: 5136

No Life

Respect for ya christmas eve wish BUT

sci·ence noun \ˈsī-ən(t)s\
Definition of SCIENCE

1
: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2
a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study
b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge
3
a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method
b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science
4
: a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws

re·li·gion noun \ri-ˈli-jən\
1
a : the state of a religious
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

Not the same my friend.

Dec 24 2010 11:09PM

0 0

noname..

Posts: 449 - Karma: 91

Karma: 91

Posts: 449

Ridiculous

Stoicism.

Bring that shit back.

Dec 25 2010 12:04AM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

*Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution describes how it works. dummy :p

Dec 25 2010 12:09AM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

Microevolution is a change in gene frequency within a population resulting from mutation, selection, gene flow, and genetic drift. Basically, macroevolution is microevolution occurring many times over a long period. Metamorphosis like in frogs, butterflies, etc. is not an example of microevolution as that is not a change in genes, it's simply the carrying out of predetermined genetic instructions. Example of microevolution: skin pigmentation. Skin pigmentation is notsomething that can be metamorphosed in a lifespan or even from one generation to the next (michael jackson excluded), however small changes in (which in this case would be changes in skin pigment to be more or less receptive to sun rays to help in vitamin d production) occur over time. This is an example of microevolution.

Dec 25 2010 12:17AM

0 0

Where-am-I

Posts: 1635 - Karma: 281

Karma: 281

Posts: 1635

Insane

this, kind of cynical, although the doing of some shit part is awesome

Dec 25 2010 12:20AM

0 0

adamlukowski

Posts: 3676 - Karma: 311

Karma: 311

Posts: 3676

Addict

My parents forced me and continue to force me to go to church... and now i think religion is all a big excuse for people that are afraid of death and what will happen to them, so they create religion to feel comfortable, and if thats what they need, then so be it.

Dec 25 2010 12:23AM

0 0

Posts: 5749 - Karma: 2,009

Karma: 2,009

Posts: 5749

No Life

Good shit. This is basically my life philosphy. Although I'm somewhat undecided on religion, but one day I want to take a trip to Jamaica & learn more about the real Rastafarian religion.

Dec 25 2010 12:26AM

0 0

Please please please reenter this debate. I'd love to know how you feel about your view getting shot down. Maybe i'll have to link you to that thread about how when people are exposed to facts they cling to their ideas even more though..

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

The term 'microevolution' has recently become popular in the anti-evolution movement, in particular among young Earth creationists to distinguish between evolutionary changes among populations which can interbreed (microevolution) and changes among populations which cannot interbreed (macroevolution). The main argument is that change beyond the species level would require similar enough changes in both a male and female in the same place and time, and that those two would have to successfully interbreed in order to create a sustainable population. Although theoretically possible, the combination of factors are seen to be so improbable as to become implausible.

The claim that microevolution is qualitatively different from macroevolution is fallacious, as the main difference between the two processes is that one occurs within a few generations, whilst the other takes place over thousands of years (i.e. a quantitative difference). Essentially they describe the same process; although evolution beyond the species level results in beginning and ending generations which could not interbreed, the intermediate generations could. Even changes in the number of chromosomes can be accounted for by intermediate stages in which a single chromosome divides in generational stages, or multiple chromosomes fuse. A well documented example is the chromosome difference between humans and great apes.

The attempt to differentiate between microevolution and macroevolution is considered to have no scientific basis by any mainstream scientific organization, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Contrary to belief among the anti-evolution movement proponents, evolution of life forms beyond the species level ("macroevolution", i.e. speciation) has indeed been observed and documented by scientists on many occasions.

Dec 25 2010 12:29AM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

My 9th grade biology teacher was a creationist. The scientific method, learn it. It separates the men from the boys (science and religion respectively). Evolution has been observed, derp. The big bang is completely irrelevant in this debate but what's the difference to a creationist? lol..

Dec 25 2010 12:35AM

0 0

Big_Meech

Posts: 152 - Karma: 33

Karma: 33

Posts: 152

Pro

Dec 25 2010 12:37AM

0 0

Posts: 5749 - Karma: 2,009

Karma: 2,009

Posts: 5749

No Life

Just wanna throw this out there, their are so many narrow-minded people out there. Like the whole "their is no proof" argument just frustrates me to no end. How do we know what's real and what isn't? Like for real, smoke a blunt and just think. How the fuck do we know anything? What constitutes reality? Is reality only what we define it to be?

Dec 25 2010 12:38AM

0 0

Posts: 3396 - Karma: -12

Karma: -12

Posts: 3396

Addict

hippie

Dec 25 2010 12:39AM

0 0

Posts: 5749 - Karma: 2,009

Karma: 2,009

Posts: 5749

No Life

Hey now, have you ever tried it? I'm not saying it makes you smarter and all that bullshit. But it's definitely opened my mind. And hopefully that wasn't the only thing you got out of my statement.

Dec 25 2010 12:41AM

0 0