Anthropogenic extinction event

@livinglava,

Intellectually challenged are you?? well, I wouldnt be so hard on myself were I you.

Its a new year, try to take a deep breath, reconnect with your store of knowledge together with your vocab and begin anew yet again.. Maybe return to one of your earlier pen names

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Intellectually challenged are you?? well, I wouldnt be so hard on myself were I you.

Its a new year, try to take a deep breath, reconnect with your store of knowledge together with your vocab and begin anew yet again.. Maybe return to one of your earlier pen names

Why are you so rude? Are you a person who uses the internet as a place to fight because you're too scared to fight with people in person?

2 Replies

@livinglava,

rude? check the mirror dude. I like to argue about art and science. I do NOT like to be fed total circular reasoning dressed in academic language.

Arguing that dominion and stewardship mean the same thing while ignoring the actual topic is, to me, cheap trick debate. The way I see that (and I believe others also "Got your number") is that you insert word salads without saying anything substantive. ANYBODY else tell you that?

Happy New Year all the same.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

Are you a person who uses the internet as a place to fight because you're too scared to fight with people in person?

As I recall, I joined this discussion with three separate points about the technical definition of "extinction event" as coined by a pretty damned good geo scientist. Then you seem to want to say "**** that Id rather argue about word meanings with this clown."
Whether you are that dumb or you think Im that dumb, kinda annoys me . I dont like being assumed Im a clown.Apparently Im wasting my time with you because youll never ever discuss the meat of the subject. Or else, I notice that, within the body of the discussion you try to occupy polr positions without any evidence for either (other than tangential references to the roles of gods and sin).

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

rude? check the mirror dude. I like to argue about art and science. I do NOT like to be fed total circular reasoning dressed in academic language.

It's not rude to trigger an intolerant person with things they are intolerant of. You seem to be a hater of everything from religion to long posts. I'm not going to cater to your hater expectations so maybe that means I should just avoid responding to your posts.

Quote:

Arguing that dominion and stewardship mean the same thing while ignoring the actual topic is, to me, cheap trick debate. The way I see that (and I believe others also "Got your number") is that you insert word salads without saying anything substantive. ANYBODY else tell you that?

It's not a cheap trick. It was a deep reflection on the difference between the two meanings in light of the changing understanding of religion by secular culture.

What I tried to explain was that there is good reason to believe the concept of 'taking dominion' always referred to stewardship from the philosophy of a good father who loves His creation/children, but that religion has been repackaged in terms of an abusive father by people who, throughout the history of religion, have hated it because they favor the lifestyle that it morally guides people away from.

In short, the religious understanding of God as a good heavenly father has been perverted by people who are like spoiled children who are angry at their father/parents for not giving them what THEY want.

1 Reply

Religions fail when they barricade themselves with specious arguments and defense mechanisms. Religions should be fluid and not solid garrisons of defense. Myths are poetry and should not be interpreted as rationalizing prose.

Religions fail when they get caught up and stuck with the symbols, which are metaphors that represent the reality, but aren't the reality themselves. The reality of the myths is within our psyche and should not be projected as objective truths. That is a misreading of myths.

Religions must stay current and consonant with science or else fade into a conflict of archaic dissonance.

1 Reply

@coluber2001,

that needs to be on a plaque. If you edit it a bit, it could be a keeper.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

In short, the religious understanding of God as a good heavenly father has been perverted by people who are like spoiled children who are angry at their father/parents for not giving them what THEY want.

Dont assume that I even buy your
stuff. As a wise philosopher once said "The confluence of science and religion doesnt exist without a script"

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:
In short, the religious understanding of God as a good heavenly father has been perverted by people who are like spoiled children who are angry at their father/parents for not giving them what THEY want.

Dont assume that I even buy your
stuff. As a wise philosopher once said "The confluence of science and religion doesnt exist without a script"

As far as I can tell, you're too biased against religion to even understand what I'm saying about it.

All I was trying to explain to you is how culture changes people's perspective on religion/God depending on what their personal lifestyle interests are.

2 Replies

@livinglava,

Its probably true that Im biased against religion but only where it tries to assert itself where its got little business. What does religion do for the subject at hand??
You cant bring any testable or falsifiable evidence forward. Youve only got philosophical wishes and empty statements that are all evidence-free.

what you guys call "evidence" are merely opinions pulled from empty air.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

All I was trying to explain to you is how culture changes people's perspective on religion/God depending on what their personal lifestyle interests are.

.

I dont have any argument with that statement. My request is for you to explain to me in an objective fashion, what need does a god even fill in science ?
Its a neat series of stories compiled by dozens, maybe hundreds of recorders. So what? My interests and career revolve around what I can discover, prove, or experiment. WHere do you begin with religion?

0 Replies

@livinglava,

BTW, someqhere youve gone and subverted your original thread title. Im really not interested in how your religion views the 6th extinction. Nor do I give a ****.
I explained to you what the basis for the definition of the 6th extinction was from the author of the phrase. My work is done . You my go off and stir up the pot about whether some guy in the sky or "Intelligence" was involved. That aint what Im about.AND apparently the science part isnt what youre interested in. So actually any argument youve started has only trapped me in because you wish to do an "expansion" about this extinction and how some deity gets his hands in it.

Work it out with your bros (of which I certainly am not one)

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Its probably true that Im biased against religion but only where it tries to assert itself where its got little business. What does religion do for the subject at hand??
You cant bring any testable or falsifiable evidence forward. Youve only got philosophical wishes and empty statements that are all evidence-free.

what you guys call "evidence" are merely opinions pulled from empty air.

I just pointed out the term 'stewardship' implies about the same thing as 'dominion' from a religious perspective.

From a religious perspective, God created the Earth and entrusted it to us to 'take dominion' of it as our home. I.e. we are supposed to steward it as well as He would for the benefit of all the creatures and the sustainable future.

'Take dominion' just means to manage it as your own home, i.e. don't trash it like it belonged to your enemy or someone else you didn't care about taking care of their stuff.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Re: coluber2001 (Post 6767882)
that needs to be on a plaque. If you edit it a bit, it could be a keeper.

Thanks, farmerman.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

Quote:

I just pointed out the term 'stewardship' implies about the same thing as 'dominion' from a religious perspective.

So I guess your gonna stick with that eh?
Nothin more I can add.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

There's little worse than being blind and oblivious to what you don't know. Living lava has a serious case of that.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

His positions are usually strongly worded but they veer out of their lanes and take off in unrelated areas that arent well evidenced by him. He started the extinction event thread and then turned it upside down nd he accused me of rudeness when I didnt really want to discuss word definitions based on catechism.

0 Replies

Anthropogenic extinction event

Quick Links

My Account

able2know