Old 22nd November 2004, 19:23   #241
GqSkrub
Major Dude
 
GqSkrub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lancaster Pennsylvania
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to GqSkrub
I <8 imaginary numbers. i also <9 and <10 them.


oh yea.. there is no way to conclusively proove the existance of gravity. just as there is no way to proove that you yourself actually exist. or that I exist. it is on this premise that xzxzzx has declared himself god and all of us figments of his imagination.

No sig here folks.
GqSkrub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 19:34   #242
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
you can conclusively prove that gravity exists. Use inductive logic:

Gravity is responsible for weight. If weight exists, then Gravity exists. Weight exists, therefore Gravity exists.

Man I love logic.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 19:51   #243
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Inductive logic:

The pressure of the atmosphere pressing down on us is responsible for what we call "gravity". If we are indeed behaving on principles of "gravity", then atmospheric pressure must indeed be pressing us down and causing this phenomenon.

See, the statement that you are holding as true comes directly in the first sentence, in your case, "gravity is responsible for weight." You've already given facts instead of proving them, which is the point of the exercise, yes?

You would have to explain logically why only gravity could be causing the phenomenon of weight, or else your statement is just a widely held assumption (and we all know about those...)
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 20:00   #244
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Your first sentence is already wrong, a correct version would be: The pressure of the atmosphere pressing on us from all directions is caused by what we call "gravity".

(According to your version there'd be no gravity on the moon!)

Care to start again?
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 20:02   #245
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
My first sentence was a postulate, not a fact.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 20:06   #246
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
well, gaek, my whole point was just that the entire point of the paragraph was being given as fact (or postulated) in the first sentence. Which means that the rest of it is there to create a non sequitur (means "doesn't follow", right?) argument.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2004, 20:34   #247
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by GqSkrub
oh yea.. there is no way to conclusively proove the existance of gravity. just as there is no way to proove that you yourself actually exist. or that I exist. it is on this premise that xzxzzx has declared himself god and all of us figments of his imagination.
You are correct!

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 05:31   #248
GqSkrub
Major Dude
 
GqSkrub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lancaster Pennsylvania
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to GqSkrub
I know. cuz i'm god too

No sig here folks.
GqSkrub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 13:03   #249
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,435
http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpu...mers/index.htm

i found this relevent to discussion. so i share it with yourselves.

CraigF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 13:16   #250
xzxzzx
Forum King
 
xzxzzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 7,254
Quote:
Originally posted by CraigF
http://www.swarthmore.edu/NatSci/cpu...mers/index.htm

i found this relevent to discussion. so i share it with yourselves.
I'd like to put some of those stickers on some of my local library's books.

Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything.
1\/\/4y 34|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? | Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base
The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.
xzxzzx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 18:26   #251
White Raven
Little Winged One
 
White Raven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Canada, now UK
Posts: 4,165
Hahahaha, very cute.

just as feathery as ever | portfolio | a poignant quote
White Raven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 18:50   #252
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by General Geoff
you can conclusively prove that gravity exists. Use inductive logic:

Gravity is responsible for weight. If weight exists, then Gravity exists. Weight exists, therefore Gravity exists.

Man I love logic.
Geoff! I din't know that things had to be that simple for you! Here you go:
God is responsible for Mankind. If Mankind exists, then God exists. Mankind exists, therefore God exists.

Quote:
Originally posted by gaekwad2
Nobody will be sent to hell against their will?

And what is "in order to promise something better, there has to be something worse." supposed to mean?
Is heaven so unattractive that you have to create hell to make it look good in comparison?
I guess, if you really want it to be. And you seem to really want it to be like that, so I guess for you it is. That perspective probably doesn't have anything to do with reality, but hey, if negativism works for you then whatever. Go back and look over these last couple pages of posts, and you haven't been able to come up with one positive conclusion or spin on anything.
If you don't first shed that negativity, nothing I say will ever satisfy you. It almost as bad as the dude in the "we need to agree on this..." thread in the news forum.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 19:33   #253
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Now you really made me laugh!

(And I fear that's the most positive thing I'll ever be able to say about your posts.)
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 20:21   #254
billyvnilly
Forum King, M.D.
 
billyvnilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Detroit burbs
Posts: 3,379
Send a message via ICQ to billyvnilly Send a message via AIM to billyvnilly
lesson for today: circular arguments
...err...maybe not...i didnt read far enough up. i think that statement took me off guard so much i didnt even look at what he quoted before reading it 'n posting.

Last edited by billyvnilly; 23rd November 2004 at 20:46.
billyvnilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 20:34   #255
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
try reading what he was quoting first, billy.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2004, 20:35   #256
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
...you saw Gen Geoff do it first, right?
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 00:38   #257
sacredpixel
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5
I'd rather live my life believing in a God, die and find out that there isn't one, than to live my life not believing and finding out that one exists.
sacredpixel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 00:45   #258
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
That argument would only work if there were only one possible god and only one way to worship him/her/it/them (if he/she/etc. wants to be worshipped at all).
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 02:32   #259
Chebyrator
Chev's Pet Ferret
(Senior Member)
 
Chebyrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California, Sacramento
Posts: 283
Send a message via ICQ to Chebyrator
Quote:
Originally posted by gaekwad2
That argument would only work if there were only one possible god and only one way to worship him/her/it/them (if he/she/etc. wants to be worshipped at all).
excelent point

Ever noticed that people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved?
- Bill Hicks
Chebyrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 02:47   #260
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
A single act of creation from a singularity implies a single God.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 02:55   #261
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
God did not create man, man created god.

Basing your beliefs of a supernatural being on the beliefs of other finite creatures seems pretty stupid to me.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 02:55   #262
Chebyrator
Chev's Pet Ferret
(Senior Member)
 
Chebyrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California, Sacramento
Posts: 283
Send a message via ICQ to Chebyrator
i am sure that there are religions or creationism stories that have multiple gods or figures doing the job

Ever noticed that people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved?
- Bill Hicks
Chebyrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:03   #263
Phyltre
Forum King
 
Phyltre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Freefall
Posts: 2,751
Send a message via AIM to Phyltre Send a message via Yahoo to Phyltre
Basing your beliefs on only the perceptions of a single mortal meaningless finite creature seems to plunge the very depths of stupidity to me, but then, that's just me.


And Chebyrator, why do you think I was talking about different creationist timelines? I was talking about the Big Bang.
Phyltre is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:15   #264
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by General Geoff
God did not create man, man created god.
God created man; man created your arguement.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:18   #265
Chebyrator
Chev's Pet Ferret
(Senior Member)
 
Chebyrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California, Sacramento
Posts: 283
Send a message via ICQ to Chebyrator
idea of fight club got into my head. how about we get together and beat the shit out of each other...

maybe we will find a meaning of life

Ever noticed that people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved?
- Bill Hicks
Chebyrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:23   #266
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
God created man; man created your arguement.
Believe whatever you want to believe. I refuse to conform to an archaic concept of creation though.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:29   #267
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
There's a mature evaluation of things:

Something's old and a lot of people like it. I'm gonna hate it!


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:48   #268
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
I don't dislike it because it's old. I dislike it because it's silly.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:49   #269
gaekwad2
Foorum King
 
gaekwad2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: bar2000
Posts: 11,424
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
There's a mature evaluation of things:

Something's old and a lot of people like it. I'm gonna hate it!
Are you referring to your attitude towards science?
gaekwad2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 03:57   #270
bgesley
Major Dude
 
bgesley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: without wax
Posts: 948
Send a message via AIM to bgesley
Give me a peice of evidence besides Genesis, that in any way helps prove Creationsm's credibility.

bgesley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 04:00   #271
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
stuff exists.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 04:03   #272
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
Stuff existing doesn't prove anything. I could say that a giant pink elephant with a sledehammer and a pair of tweezers constructed the universe out of his belly button lint. That doesn't mean it's true.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 04:13   #273
Mattress
Forum King
 
Mattress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 4,577
but it's still creationism.
Mattress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 04:14   #274
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Really?
I didn't realize that this:
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake


Scientific theories can attempt to explain the beginings of the universe, but streach themselves far enough from the mathamatical and scientific truths that they are founded in, that their best efforts are unsatisfying to even the most stictly deductive thinkers (hence the continued scientific reasearch into the subject). However, these scientific theories do lend themselves to be very specific in that they are limited to the laws of deductive reasoning and are attempts to discredit the theory of God, because to them God is not concrete

Likewise, the truth is that the Bible is rather vague and unsatisfying about the scientific details of Creation, especially depending on how you read it, but it is especially specific at the same time (even moreso when you get into the Hebrew) in presenting God's plan of salvation for creation through a Messiah, which I happen to think is JC.

So what we do end up having is two groups of people talking to each other about something that means different things to the respective groups. To the Big-Bangist, the begining of the universe is about logical deduction of things observed. To a Creationist, it is about the begining of the greatest story ever told, which we are all apart of.

However, no one ever seems to understand the motive of the other group, and instead talks about there own "fact base" which is not the topic at hand. In an attempt to find common ground, very often a creationist can be pulled into a geological discussion (or something similar) at which point the scientific crowd marvels at the inability and vagueness displayed. Likewise, very often, a scientist can be moved into the realm of Metaphysical Philosophy (or something similar) and is likewise scoffed. Either way, noone's really talking about anything the otherone is.

In summary: Creationism vs Big Banganism (or whatever you want to call it) two different crowds at two different stadiums watching two different ballgames (each with their own different rules ).

[edit] sp.

was an immature evaluation of Science.

I really think you've written me off too quickly Gaekwad.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 04:28   #275
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
You know what? You're right, they are two different ballgames. I respect Science more because it is a systematic attempt to "deshroud" the darkness of ignorance that surrounds us and the workings of our environment. Conversely, religion is akin to stabbing in the dark; there could be any one of a billion different explanations as to what religion attempts to explain. It doesn't help that oftentimes religious doctrine and books are very vague.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 05:54   #276
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Thanks for taking what I say out of context.

Things like that really help convince me that science's attempt to "deshroud" the darkness around me is truly "systematic" and unbiased.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 06:50   #277
petitechloe664y
Senior Member
 
petitechloe664y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 269
this is a very profound discussion
petitechloe664y is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 07:28   #278
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
Quote:
Originally posted by shakey_snake
Thanks for taking what I say out of context.

Things like that really help convince me that science's attempt to "deshroud" the darkness around me is truly "systematic" and unbiased.
I don't see what you're getting at. It's true. Religion is nothing without blind faith. As such, you really are just stabbing in the dark. At least with science, we work for a cumulative answer based on things we already know. If something proves what we already know wrong, then we adapt. Kinda like the Borg, in a strange sense.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 07:54   #279
shakey_snake
Forum Domo
 
shakey_snake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Everyone, get over here for the picture!
Posts: 4,313
Quote:
Originally posted by General Geoff
I don't see what you're getting at.
Of course you don't. You didn't really understand what I was getting in the post where I quoted myself.

Lets as an example say that I had said:
{1,2,3}

You would interprete this as:
1,2
---hey lookwhats inbetween those: 1.1, 1.2
----hey lookwhats inbetween those: 1.11,1.12
---where was I.... oh yeah! 3.

You see all the parts, 1 and 2 and 3, and you see the specifics that point to those, and what is in between those, but you fail to see the set of {1,2,3} as a whole.


elevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladyelevatorladylevitateme
shakey_snake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th February 2005, 08:02   #280
General Geoff
Major Dude
 
General Geoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Allentown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,254
Send a message via ICQ to General Geoff Send a message via AIM to General Geoff
Nope, I grasp your concept as a whole and I still think it's silly. Once again, stabbing in the dark. Just because the bible says it covers everything, doesn't mean it's right.

General Geoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Community Center > General Discussions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump