farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 01:31 pm
Chum-I guess Ive actually seen some of those Bradbury stories on one of the old shows on SCiFi or HBO. Its not that I dont read SCiFi, Im just not an afficionado . I can enjoy some and, like the old Poe or Lovecraft tales, I can appreciate them but not be taken up .
I remember Steve King once wrote a couple of works that were specifically about "how he got his story lines". It was interesting how the "Hard SUpernatural" and some of the merely strange were thought through.

All the scifi of that Rex is speaking, is I guess, would be called HSF. Where there is an actual science principal involved, not a Star Trek , wherein Spock, Bones and Kirk go back to a world made of gangster mimics, (Although that was developed at a time when the multiverse hypothesis was being derived)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 01:34 pm
fm, On my recent vacation to Guatemala and Costa Rica, I met a surgeon who recommended "Longitutde" by Dava Sobel. Have you read or heard of this book? If yes, do you think it's worth the read?
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 01:42 pm
Since the subject of SF has come up, I am very sad to say Stanislaw Lem has died.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 02:04 pm
Bradbury is really in the realm of science fantasy -- "The Martian Chronicles," for instance, never explains how humans can breath without any kind of breathing apparatus on Mars. Even the miniseries has everyone wandering around sans breathing equipment.

Science Fiction may seem to have predicted a lot of modern technology but, in fact, it was there if one did the research -- the writer just had to believe it was possible to convey to their readers that it was possible. Sci-Fi is not written in a vacuum.

The fantasy of the Bible, however, is not believable.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 04:04 pm
farmerman wrote:
Chum-I guess Ive actually seen some of those Bradbury stories on one of the old shows on SCiFi or HBO. Its not that I dont read SCiFi, Im just not an afficionado . I can enjoy some and, like the old Poe or Lovecraft tales, I can appreciate them but not be taken up .
I remember Steve King once wrote a couple of works that were specifically about "how he got his story lines". It was interesting how the "Hard SUpernatural" and some of the merely strange were thought through.

All the scifi of that Rex is speaking, is I guess, would be called HSF. Where there is an actual science principal involved, not a Star Trek , wherein Spock, Bones and Kirk go back to a world made of gangster mimics, (Although that was developed at a time when the multiverse hypothesis was being derived)
Edgar Allan Poe wrote a hoax centered on the first crossing of the Atlantic in a balloon and sold it to the New York Sun. It appeared on April 13, 1844 headlined in an extra heralding: "The Atlantic Crossed in Three Days!" The story went on to say: "The great problem is at length solved. The Air, as well as Earth and the Ocean, has been subdued by science, and will become a common and convenient highway for mankind. The Atlantic has actually been crossed in a balloon!"

The story that followed was about five thousand words in length. To summarize it, Monck Mason had applied the principle of the Archimedian screw to the propulsion of a dirigible balloon. The gas bag was an ellipsoid thirteen feet long with a car suspended from it. The screw propeller, which was attached to the car, was operated by a spring. A rudder shaped like a battledore kept the airship on its course.

The voyagers, according to the story, started from Mr. Osborne's home in North Wales, intending to sail across the English Channel. The mechanism of the propeller broke, and the balloon, caught in a strong northeast wind, was carried across the Atlantic at a speed of sixty or more miles an hour. Mr. Mason kept a journal, to which, at the end of each day, Mr. Ainsworth added a postscript. The balloon landed safely on the coast of South Carolina, near Fort Moultrie.

The names of the supposed voyagers were well chosen by Poe to give credibility to the hoax. Monck Mason and Robert Holland were of the small party which actually sailed from Vauxhall Gardens, London, on the afternoon of November 7, 1836, in the balloon Nassau and landed at Weilberg, Germany, five hundred miles away, eighteen hours later. The others named by Poe were familiar figures of the period.

Poe used a plan of having real people do the things that they would like to do. The balloon hoax, however, lasted for only a day. The Sun itself said on April 15, 1844: "Balloon -- the mails from the south ... not having brought confirmation of the balloon from England ... we are inclined to believe that the intelligence is erroneous."

Poe went on to bigger and better things, although like many talented artists, his real fame and fortune were to elude him in his own lifetime. People fondly remember Poe for Murders in the Rue Morgue and the Tell Tale Heart but newspaper aficionados will think of him fondly as the author of the balloon hoax.

http://www.historybuff.com/library/refballoon.html
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 04:06 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
God is now "a person." Laughing

Three guesses who thinks they are that person.


Well the trinity attributes God with three "persons"... One is enough for me...
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 04:11 pm
Here is Poe's actual balloon hoax story
http://www.infomotions.com/alex2/authors/poe-edgar/poe-balloon-683/
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 04:47 pm
God is actually many persons but one God.

I see God as the creator... God as the creator is so massive that the creator is all knowing but incapable of a personal connection with this creation.

It is another person (or personality) of God that after creation is tender and intimate with creation. This personality is just as much God as any other personality.

This is why the Bible says let "us" make man in our "own" image... because we have the personable and the impersonal, all in one image or person... (personalities and character make up a person)

So God as one personality or character has expressed himself in creating the world and God as another has expressed himself in loving the world.

Jesus is not this person or redeemer part of God but he is a byproduct of this redeemer part of God in action.

Elohim is the impersonal
and Yahweh (Jehovah) is the personable.

Jehovah has many virtuous qualities Elohim has resplendent infinite power.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08329a.htm
Elohim is the impersonal creator part of God.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05393a.htm

They are not two persons but personalities of the same person.

God is represented in plural ( and these personalities given names) to draw attention to this.

The 23 psalm contains in one psalm ten names/personalities/characteristics of Jehovah.

Jehovah is my shepherd

Jehovah is my sufficiency

Jehovah is my peace

etc...

So all of these personalities are part of "God" not the angels or Jesus but God... we/they are images of these divine qualities, when we/they adorn the spirit (gift of God) and walk in this wisdom and truth the holy spirit is "quickened" as a result...

This is equally part of the evolution of man/woman...
0 Replies
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 09:14 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
God is now "a person." Laughing

Three guesses who thinks they are that person.


Laughing If I were God I would have done things a bit differently...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 09:24 pm
You're too modest; you would have done many things differently. God's success rate for fauna is less than 5 percent; about 95 percent are now extinct.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 09:57 pm
God has also been equated to Edison -- apparantly he/she/it is a trial-and-error research and development engineer. What's his biggest mistake, considering what life form has done the most damage on Earth, to flora and fauna and to themselves? Evolution has the answer, religion has failed miserably in providing the answer other than some whistling-in-the-dark wishful thinking. God is creative in the way the Ash Can school of art was creative -- putting crap together to make more crap. Really requires a great deal of talent.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 10:56 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
You're too modest; you would have done many things differently. God's success rate for fauna is less than 5 percent; about 95 percent are now extinct.


Do humans have dinosaur genes?
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 10:59 pm
Only very fat humans have dinosaur jeans.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:04 pm
I think I'm a dinosaur... Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:05 pm
...But I am not very fat...
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:08 pm
http://www.gifanimations.com/Image/Animations/Smiley-Faces/~TS1146373614166/smiley_022.gif
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:15 pm
http://images.animationfactory.com/imagedir/animations/computer/computers/man_stuck_in_computer_monitor/man_stuck_in_computer_monitor_sm_nwm.gif
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:35 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
God has also been equated to Edison -- apparantly he/she/it is a trial-and-error research and development engineer. What's his biggest mistake, considering what life form has done the most damage on Earth, to flora and fauna and to themselves? Evolution has the answer, religion has failed miserably in providing the answer other than some whistling-in-the-dark wishful thinking. God is creative in the way the Ash Can school of art was creative -- putting crap together to make more crap. Really requires a great deal of talent.


You seem a bit conflicted, Lightwiz.

If evolution is responsible for life as we now see it (including the absence of the many species that are now extinct), then it is evolution that has failed you miserably.

And evolution has caused the most damage to flora and fauna, since it is (in your view) evolution that produced mankind.

Everything man is, results from evolution, right?

So anything man does in an attempt to survive is part of evolution, right?

If other species can't stand up to man, then too tough. It's survival of the fittest, right?

How can you blame God for something you claim to believe that evolution has caused?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Apr, 2006 12:38 am
It's not god's evolution after all....
0 Replies
 
aperson
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Apr, 2006 12:39 am
real life wrote:
Lightwizard wrote:
God has also been equated to Edison -- apparantly he/she/it is a trial-and-error research and development engineer. What's his biggest mistake, considering what life form has done the most damage on Earth, to flora and fauna and to themselves? Evolution has the answer, religion has failed miserably in providing the answer other than some whistling-in-the-dark wishful thinking. God is creative in the way the Ash Can school of art was creative -- putting crap together to make more crap. Really requires a great deal of talent.


You seem a bit conflicted, Lightwiz.

If evolution is responsible for life as we now see it (including the absence of the many species that are now extinct), then it is evolution that has failed you miserably.

And evolution has caused the most damage to flora and fauna, since it is (in your view) evolution that produced mankind.

Everything man is, results from evolution, right?

So anything man does in an attempt to survive is part of evolution, right?

If other species can't stand up to man, then too tough. It's survival of the fittest, right?

How can you blame God for something you claim to believe that evolution has caused?


Evolution is responsible for damage to flora and fauna, and the birth of mankind, but (in you view) God is responsible for everything, and so he is responsible for evolution.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution? How?
  3. » Page 481
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 11/19/2024 at 05:24:48